Little River Wetlands Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351809569
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Fort Wayne, IN, USA
Phone
2604782515
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$404,761
Expenses
$362,490
Assets
$3,331,663
Liabilities
$7,671

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL MCAFEE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAMMY SUTTER (EXECUTIVE DI): $61,616 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 restore and protect wetlands in the historic watershed of the little river, a major tributary of the wabash river, and to provide educational opportunities that encourage good stewardship of wetlands and other natural ecosystems.

What it reported doing in 2025

Seed to marsh program: lrwp creatively blends its dual mission of wetland restoration and education through seed to marsh, a hands-on initiative where community members collect native seeds, grow them into seedlings, and transplant them into the wetlands. These efforts help restore areas impacted by invasive species. Participants learn about native flora and restoration practices, contributing directly to ecosystem health. Plants grown through the program are also shared through free plant giveaways and seed libraries, extending benefits to the broader community. Educational outreach: since 2006, lrwp's free educational programming has reached more than 145,000 individuals. Programs are inclusive and stem- based, serving audiences from preschool to college through field trips, guided hikes, senior programs, and major public events like earth day fort wayne and the monarch festival. In 2025 alone, over 8,000 people participated, including 1,500 children participating in free school field trip programming, with approximately 35% from historically underserved communities. Citizen science: eagle marsh serves as a regional hub for citizen science, offering opportunities for trained volunteers to collect and report data on monarchs, nesting birds, bats, and water quality to national databases. In partnership with local universities, the preserve also supports herpetological research and provides real-world field experience for steam students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.7%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 68.4%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.4%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.19; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.7% of revenue deployed · 68.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $248K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.