Wildlifedirect Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300256542
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Davis, WV, USA
Phone
3012219800
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International, Foreign Affairs, and National Security N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$589,379
Expenses
$235,763
Assets
$679,150
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Zain Verjee (Chair)
  • Wesley Della Volla (Treasurer)
  • Asher Jay (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

WildlifeDirect makes grants to WildlifeDirect Kenya to pursue the following accomplishments:1 Defending the integrity of protected areas seeking justice for wildlife and people and campaigning to secure critical wildlife buffer zones dispersal areas and corridors. We work to ensure that every citizen can use their right to public participation in matters related to wildlife and the environment.2 Changing the narrative of conservation in Africa by producing African positive films and developing the capacity of African storytellers. To inspire our own people we produce Wildlife Warriors a popular wildlife TV series about our wildlife heroes and heroines and the animals that they are saving. We aim to transform and catalyze the wildlife film making industry in Africa. 3 Education and Outreach through over 100 Wildlife Warriors Kids Clubs in schools to give children hands-on knowledge life-changing experiences and opportunities to make a difference in the world that they live.

What it reported doing in 2025

Support for WildlifeDirect Kenya

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.6%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 96.5%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 60%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.88; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.6% of revenue deployed · 96.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $228K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.