Western Watershed Projects Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943202140
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Hailey, ID, USA
Phone
2087882290
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,073,382
Expenses
$2,000,862
Assets
$629,223
Liabilities
$8,600

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLISON JONES (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIK MOLVAR (EXECUTIVE DI): $122,356 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To protect and restore western watersheds and wildlife through education, public policy intiatives and legal advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2025

Monitoring - identify damaged watersheds and document abusive land management practices. Report the following: - livestock numbers on grazing allotments - turnout times - abusive grazing - degredation of streams and stream banks - destruction of riparian and upland habitat - degredation of cultural, historic, archaeological and scenis resources - illegal diversions of water - negative impacts to wilderness values, roadless areas, wilderness study areas and designated wilderness.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.5%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.1% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.