Lake Manitou Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237074534
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Rochester, IN, USA
Phone
5742232795
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$191,652
Expenses
$73,032
Assets
$809,355
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WAYNE HOLLEMAN (Vice President)
  • ABBY RENIE (President)

People named in this filing

  • KENNY ANDERSON (Director)
  • NICK BOKAN (Director)
  • GARY BRYANT (Director)

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

Long term conservation of lake manitou

What it reported doing in 2025

1. Will facilitate the exchange of information on all aspects of the property management of lake manitou and it's resources.2. Promote through education a public awareness of lake manitou's ecosystem3. Encourage public support for national, state or local programs that promote the management of lake manitou.4. Identify needs and encourage research on the ecology and watershed management of lake manitou5. Provide a forum for residents and other interested in lake manitou's preservation to express their concerns regarding lake management, and to act upon those concerns.

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.1%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 61.9%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.08; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.1% of revenue deployed · 67.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 13 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $49K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.