Oregon Maple Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 850522617
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Parkdale, OR, USA
- Phone
- 5038692761
- Rating
- 37
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $33,205
- Expenses
- $24,700
- Assets
- $37,805
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- Eliza Nelson (Chair)
- Erin LeFevre (Treasurer)
- Katie Cardwell (Secretary)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Oregon Maple Project is an educational nonprofit that produces Bigleaf Maple syrup in collaboration with students and community members. We teach the art of Bigleaf maple sugaring to participants of all ages through field trips, workshops, family days, and a season-long sugaring collective.
What it reported doing in 2025
During the winter of 2025, the Oregon Maple Project (OMP) hosted 23 field trips for 700 students and 150 adults at our Camp Colton location. OMP also engaged 300 people in maple sugaring workshops, 90 participants in family maple camps, 35 members in our sugaring collective, and 2000 more individuals through tabling events in the greater community. At the OMP sugarhouse, one staff member and 30 volunteers worked throughout the winter to tap 175 trees, harvest and process 300 gallons of sap, and produce 2.5 gallons of Bigleaf Maple Syrup.
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.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 3
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 3%; rating input score 3
- Program expense ratio: 4%; rating input score 4
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.6%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 67.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 3% of revenue deployed · 4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 1 filing year from 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 3/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 4/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.