Glen Lake Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381658580
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Glen Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
2313347645
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$563,892
Expenses
$439,551
Assets
$3,569,800
Liabilities
$43,950

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAMARA CUTLER (PRESIDENT)
  • STAN KRYDER (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • KATE GILLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATE GILLE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $81,731 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the association is to preserve and protect the water quality, natural resources, and quality of life in the glen lake/crystal river watershed through leadership, education, and collaboration. The association aims to be the recognized leader in evidence-based strategies for protection of the watershed while advancing environmental education, sustainable policies, and quality of life on or near watershed lakes and streams.

What it reported doing in 2025

Promotion of the improvement of, and to sponsor and engage in the scientific testing of, the quality of the waters constituting the glen lake watershed. Publication of information concerning such water quality tests and other educational and instructional information concerning water quality, the prevention and control of pollution, and the protection of the environment and natural resources in the area of the glen lake waters.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.3%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 63.9%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.12; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.3% of revenue deployed · 63.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $281K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.