Farmington River Watershed Association
Legal name: Farmington River Watershed Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 060741585
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Simsbury, CT, US
- Phone
- 860-658-4442
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $645,584
- Expenses
- $665,173
- Assets
- $2,896,401
- Liabilities
- $305,635
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN LAUDATI (President)
- Robin Baran (Vice President)
- BRIAN FREEMAN (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Aimee Petras (Executive Dir.): $79,802 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 protect, preserve, and restore the Farmington River and its watershed.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advocacy in support of the Wild & Scenic designation on 14 miles of the upper Farmington River, including for sound management of water quality and quantity, for riverbank and riparian buffer protection, in town land use proceedings, and through participation in the Farmington River Coordinating Committee. AS PART OF THE LEGISLATION TO PROTECT THIS SEGMENT, THE UPPER FARMINGTON RIVER COORDINATING committee WAS CREATED TO COORDINATE THE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES OF THE PRIVATE TOWN, STATE, AND FEDERAL GROUPS PROTECTING THIS SEGMENT OF THE RIVER TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY AND INFORMATION SHARING.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 92
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.6%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
- Fundraising efficiency: $29.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th 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: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.35; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 91.6% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $577K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 18 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.