Friends of Dragon Run Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541565794
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Gloucester, VA, USA
Phone
7035051990
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,628,986
Expenses
$54,432
Assets
$2,941,352
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Carol Kauffman (President)
  • Jim Ewan (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Carol Kauffman (President)
  • Jim Ewan (Vice President)
  • Adrienne Frank (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

Preserving protecting and encouraging the wise use of Dragon Run and its watershed by fostering public engagement with the watershed through guided kayak tours and hikes; by training and mentoring environmental education teachers and their students; by acquiring lands in the watershed and putting them under conservation easements; and by speaking to the public about conservation at community events meetings and conferences.

What it reported doing in 2025

Mentored middle and high school teachers to support their environmental education efforts furnished them with essential materials and hosted their students on guided kayak tours and nature hikes

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 32
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 95
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 4.3%; rating input score 4
  • Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 96.7%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 54.04; rating input score 99; 99th 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: 24.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 4.3% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.