Wildlaw

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721373006
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Montgomery, AL, USA
Phone
3342219668
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$530,449
Expenses
$623,071
Assets
$391,063
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Environmental protection: WildLaw represents other environmental, conservation & community non-profit organizations in cases and legal education efforts to protect land, water, air, wildlife, forests, and more.

What it reported doing in 2010

Public Lands Protection: representing national, regional and local organizations working on the protection of public lands, such as National Forests, National Parks, National Wildlife Refuges, Army Corps of Engineers land, and many others. Represented over 30 organizations, with more than 50,000 members, involving public land management issues in the southern states. Worked with the U.S. Forest Service on its Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration Program FACA Committee to rate and distribute $10,000,000 in federal grants to restoration projects around the nation. Also played a key NGO role in helping the Forest Service develop its new national forest management planning regulations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th 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; 64th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $606K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.