Grasse River Heritage Area Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161567484
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Canton, NY, USA
Phone
3152126188
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,959
Expenses
$34,620
Assets
$1,062,674
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM LANGEN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TOM LANGEN (PRESIDENT)
  • PEGGY DECOOKE (VICE-PRESIDE)
  • CONRAD STUNTZ (TREASURER)

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

The grasse river heritage area development corporation, seeks to develop and promote cultural, economic, educational and recreational opportunities, and to improve the aesthetic appearance and environmental quality within the grasse river corridor in the village and town of canton.

What it reported doing in 2025

Maintenance and educational activities at three public parks: heritage park, willow island sculpture garden, and dwight church park. Maintenance of a community meeting room.

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 96% 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 - 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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 78.3%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: -8.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 30.7; rating input score 88; 88th 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: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.1% of revenue deployed · 78.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $27K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.