Minnesota Forestry Workforce Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 933117476
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Duluth, MN, USA
- Phone
- 2187220128
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $199,630
- Expenses
- $167,047
- Assets
- $49,257
- Liabilities
- $3,115
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RAY HIGGINS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- RICK HORTON (EXECUTIVE DI)
- RAY HIGGINS (PRESIDENT)
- MANDY GOLDSMITH (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Build a skilled workforce that supports Minnesota's thriving forestry sector driving sustainability, innovation, and economic growth.
What it reported doing in 2024
Marketing and outreach initiatives - participated in 12 career fairs and major industry events, introducing thousands of people to forestry works of Minnesota. Coordinated high school speaking engagements in 6 different schools adn established connections with other loacal high schools and colleges for career and technical education programs. Saw an increase in employer engagement, with 22 employers posting new jobs opportunties and 35 job listing views converting into multiple applications.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 94.4%; rating input score 94
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 16.3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 34.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 79% of revenue deployed · 94.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $158K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.