Meadowview Biological Research Station

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541904513
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Woodford, VA, US
Phone
+1 804 633 4336
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Biological & Life Sciences

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,430
Expenses
$111,359
Assets
$1,797,559
Liabilities
$715,867

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR PHIL SHERIDAN (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DR PHIL SHERIDAN (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • CHASE HOWARD (DIRECTOR)
  • DR ROBERT WRIGHT (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

To preserve and restore pitcher plants bogs, and associated ecosystems in Maryland and Virginia utilizing a unique five step process of discovery, propagation, research, reintroduction, and education. To establish a series of nature preserves to protect indigenous pitcher plant systems in perpetuity.

What it reported doing in 2025

Research-conduting studies on the genetics, biochemistry ecology and population biology of rare plants

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% 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

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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 19th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -40.2%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.14; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 5 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $111K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • 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 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.