Indian Creek Nature Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237260197
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cedar Rapids, IA, USA
Phone
3193620664
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,919,146
Expenses
$2,267,783
Assets
$11,332,436
Liabilities
$241,031

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HALL JOHN (PRESIDENT)
  • HAYES DAVID (FORMER PRESIDENT)
  • MYERS JOHN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MYERS JOHN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $132,876 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

It is the purpose of the nature center to promote a sustainable future by: nurturing individuals through environmental education, providing leadership in land protection and restoration, and encouraging responsible interaction with nature.

What it reported doing in 2025

Etzel sugar grove farm: the purpose of etzel sugar grove farm is to establish sustainable, economically viable regenerative, organic farming practices and create champions of nature through education and replication of these practices. Etzel sugar grove farm is a 190-acre farmstead located just outside marion, ia. The farm was donated to icnc in 2016.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.19 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 78.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $133K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.