Wyoming Wildlife Advocates

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472017253
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Wilson, WY, USA
Phone
3076903983
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$493,587
Expenses
$297,749
Assets
$217,151
Liabilities
$1,991

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JIM LAYBOURN (Director): $14,117 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote science-based wildlife management that fosters ecosystem health and dynamic equilibrium between species throughout the state of Wyoming.

What it reported doing in 2024

Jackson hole bear solutions is a program of Wyoming wildlife advocates dedicated to bear conservation and reducing humanbearconflicts in the jackson hole area of Wyoming. Their primary mission is to protect both bears and the safety of the local community. Theyachieve this by offering expert bearawareeducation, offering free or reduced cost bearresistantgarbage management, and employingproactive bear deterrent strategies. This proactive approach helps prevent bears from becoming habituated to human food sources andultimately minimizes the need for killing of bears in teton county. Jackson hole bear solutions plays a pivotal role in fostering aharmonious coexistence between bears and the human population in the region while preserving these charismatic, yet vulnerable, creatures.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% 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.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.5%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 43.9%; rating input score 44
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.5% of revenue deployed · 43.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $131K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $14K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.