Ozark Natural Science Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710705259
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Huntsville, AR, USA
Phone
4792028340
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$634,672
Expenses
$609,560
Assets
$690,811
Liabilities
$199,136

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LUCAS REGNIER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JUSTIN BULLA (VICE-PRES SE)
  • KEN EWING (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MICHAEL HENRY (BOARD MEMBER)

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 enhance the understanding appreciation and stewardship of the ozark natural environment by providing education programs. These programs immerse participants in the ozarks ecosystems and celebrate ecological and cultural diversity foster conservation and stewardship and nurture appreciation of the nature of the ozarks. Our programs focus on helping children and adults develop a sense of place and a wonder for the diversity of life and the importance of natural systems around us.

What it reported doing in 2024

School programs and camps - onscs main campus includes the ewing event center three lodges the smith education building guest housing faculty housing the stewart springfield memorial outdoor classroom the lewis pavilion an observation deck and hiking trails. Onscs urban locations include an education center and hiking trails at lake fayetteville and a nature center outdoor classroom and hiking trails at kessler mountain. Onscs school programming and camps offer hands-on experiential field science opportunities to more than 3,000 students per year. Onsc also offers public programs classes and workshops for adults and families. These are scheduled throughout the year in all three locations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 65.9%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 65.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $402K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 45 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.