Killbuck Watershed Land Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341938078
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Wooster, OH, USA
Phone
3308045958
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$634,006
Expenses
$501,237
Assets
$1,152,638
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Randy Carmel (President)
  • Robert Stutzman (Vice President)
  • Tate Emerson (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tate Emerson (Executive Director): $40,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To acquire and hold agricultural and conservation easements, encourage land preservation and assist individuals in creating agriculture andconservation easements. During 2025 the organization incurred approximately 432875 dollars restoring the preserves wetland property the work supported wetland restoration wildlife habitat water quality and long term conservation of the property

What it reported doing in 2025

At the end of the 2025 tax year the killbuck watershed land trust held a total of 87 easements totaling 10612 acres five properties were owned by the organization one property of 114 acres is woods and native prairie and four properties of wetlands and woods make up of 27 acres 157 acres 194 acres and 91 acres during the 2025 tax year three new easements were received none of the easements which are currently held by the organization fall into any of the following categories encumberment of a golf course within or adjacent to residential development or housing subdivisions acquired under purchase of real property from charitable organization in notice 2004 41 all 87 current easements were periodically reviewed and monitored by various board members board members spend an average of

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% 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 - 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.6%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.9%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.3; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.6% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $433K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.