Friends of Caesar Creek

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311295670
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Waynesville, OH, USA
Phone
5138505391
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,526
Expenses
$8,511
Assets
$140,989
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Stefanie Paeg (President)
  • Steve Lee (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Stefanie Paeg (President)
  • Steve Lee (Vice President)
  • Debi Wolterman (Secretary)

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

Organized to dedicate educating the public about the natural resources of the Caesarss Creek lake region. They support the educational, scientific, and historical activities of the region by offering various workshops and programs.

What it reported doing in 2025

During 2025 focc provided 200 butterfly tags for project monarch watch through public and school programs over 200 monarchs caught, and tagged for research. Over 150 students volunteered to help with this event. We received information that monarch agex tagged august 30, 2022 at caesar creek had reached the wintering grounds march 30, 2023, in mexico

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.57; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.