Lafayette Tree Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351896066
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Lafayette, IN, USA
Phone
7654901464
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$93,976
Expenses
$92,696
Assets
$109,549
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARRY BRUCE (PRESIDENT)
  • JENELLE ROTAR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EUGENE KROESCHEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • BARRY BRUCE (PRESIDENT)
  • JENELLE ROTAR (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PATRICIA ROSEBROCK (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Planting and maintaining street trees and educating about trees in lafayette, in

What it reported doing in 2025

Education about trees in elementary school classrooms, totaling 729 students in 10 elementary schools

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.18; rating input score 52; 52nd 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 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $172K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.