Northern Forest Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223458955
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Concord, NH, USA
Phone
6032290679
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,877,036
Expenses
$8,171,621
Assets
$16,453,100
Liabilities
$7,158,735

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT RILEY (President)
  • JOE SHORT (Vice President)
  • LAUREL WILL (Vice President of Finance)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT RILEY (President): $197,963 total reported compensation
  • JOE SHORT (Vice President): $140,417 total reported compensation
  • LAUREL WILL (Vice President of Finance): $108,926 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Northern Forest Center creates bold possibilities that give rise to vibrant Northern Forest communities and envisions a thriving and welcoming Northern Forest region sustained by innovation and environmental stewardship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Catalyzing innovation in the forest economy: The Center helps create and improve jobs and build local wealth through opportunities that advance a regional land ethic and sustainable use of the forest. Highlights: Wood Heat: Since inception, the "Feel Good Heat" program has reduced greenhouse gas impact by 13,648 tons by substituting wood pellets for more than 2 million gallons of fossil fuels, generating $13.4 million in positive economic impact for the region. Wood Products Business Assistance: The Center supported 1,650 jobs by: providing custom business and marketing assistance to 49 wood products businesses; providing 9 wood products CEOs from ME and VT with business assistance throughout the year through the Northern Forest Board Forum; and coaching 34 wood product businesses to use their wood-origin stories in their marketing through the online workshop "Telling Your Forest Story." Forest Stewardship: The Center advocated for a holistic approach to forest management that includes the forest, the economy, societal benefits, and the communities that rely on the forest; supported the communities of Otisfield and Gilead, ME to create new Community Forests; worked with 8 Community Forests in the Androscoggin Valley of NH and ME to strengthen forest climate resilience; and engaged more 300 people through webinars on forest stewardship to broaden understanding of the roles and benefits of forests. Outdoor Recreation Development: The Center partnered with 61 communities, 80 partner organizations, and more than 100 businesses to improve trails and other outdoor recreation opportunities that attract visitors and provide amenities for residents. We completed a recreation investment strategy to help guide development of the outdoor recreation economy in Maine's Katahdin region and launched similar project focused on Northern NH and the Northeast Kingdom of VT; assisted communities in the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont, Coos County, NH, and Oxford County, ME, to manage for sustainable tourism and quality of life for residents through initiatives spawned by the Rural Tourism Academy, including continued implementation of new wayfinding systems in Newport, VT and the Katahdin region of ME; and provided strategic development support for sustainable tourism to businesses in the Moosehead Lake region of ME. Details are available at www.northernforest.org.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 7.9%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.01; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 28% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.7% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $7.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $198K · 26 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 52 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 51 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.