Michigan Forest Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381981176
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Okemos, MI, USA
Phone
5178167879
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$296,473
Expenses
$278,171
Assets
$538,586
Liabilities
$49,034

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EMILY SILVER (PRESIDENT)
  • ELAN LIPSCHITZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN POTTER-WITTER (IMMED. PAST PRESIDENT)
  • NICOLE FROST (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • EMILY SILVER (PRESIDENT)
  • ELAN LIPSCHITZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN POTTER-WITTER (IMMED. PAST 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

To promote good management on all forest land; to educate our members about good forest practices and stewardship of the land; to inform the general public about forestry issues and the benefits of good forest management.

What it reported doing in 2024

Property management of land and special projects to provide outreach and education sites, demonstrations, and opportunities for the public to view and experience various forest system management actions, with the purpose of helping citizens understand the importance of stewardship of our forests and woodlands through sustainable decisions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 83% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 6.2%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.94; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.1% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $264K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.