Northwoods Stewardship Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030346759
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
East Charleston, VT, USA
Phone
8027236551
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,639,681
Expenses
$2,049,615
Assets
$3,919,108
Liabilities
$334,940

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESSE COE (PRESIDENT)
  • MARIA YOUNG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARIA YOUNG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $100,072 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Connecting people and place through science, education and action.

What it reported doing in 2025

The northwoods conservation corps is a hands-on conservation-based education and employment program for youth (ages 14 and up) and emerging professionals (adults who comprise the professional crews). Crew members are hired from communities surrounding project areas and are provided with high-quality conservation training and environmental education. The experience provides an excellent opportunity for youth to explore career paths in various fields of conservation and science and natural resources and provides a meaningful work experience for emerging professionals. In 2025, we employed more than 60 conservation corps staff! The conservation corps project partners include federal agencies, local volunteer organizations, and a wide range of community, conservation and recreation organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 71.6%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 21st 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: 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: 22.4%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56% of revenue deployed · 71.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $120K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 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.

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.