Lake Dunmore Fern Lake Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030334363
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Salisbury, VT, USA
Phone
2033130503
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$254,180
Expenses
$316,823
Assets
$2,220,541
Liabilities
$883

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Louis Miron (1st Vice President)
  • Sean Sweeney (2nd Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jaap Ketting (Treasurer)
  • Suzie Crews (Trustee)
  • Louis Miron (1st Vice President)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Protect and enhance the natural vitality of Lake Dunmore and Fern Lake while preserving the recreational and lifestyle interest of the Lakes community

What it reported doing in 2024

Milfoil management efforts on both lakes includes, among other things: a) a crew of divers pulling individual plants found in our visual surveys; b) diver assisted suction harvesting for dense patches of milfoil growth; c) daily accounting of harvested bushels of milfoil by region; and d) a fall rake survey of the littoral zone on both lakes.In addition, our Greeters provide complimentary inspections of boats, trailers, and all other watercrafts while educating boaters and other lake users about the threat of AIS and the prevention of their spread.The Greeters also distribute educational materials.The objective of our milfoil program is to prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species and to educate users about AIS and how to reduce or prevent their spread.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -24.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $291K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.