Red Pine Camp Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261211067
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Minocqua, WI, USA
Phone
7153566231
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,857,967
Expenses
$1,705,101
Assets
$5,791,325
Liabilities
$317,455

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHIP HALVERSON -TERM END 1225 (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CONSTANCE SCHOLFIELD (EXECUTIVE/CA): $176,277 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At red pine camp for girls we are committed to inspiring and enabling young women to reach their full potential in a safe, healthy and fun environment. Our program and activities are firmly rooted in an appreciation for our natural surroundings, the development of athletic skill and respect for one another as individuals. We recognize and promote the values of integrity, leadership, grace, compassion and character in every camper.

What it reported doing in 2025

At red pine camp for girls we are committed to inspiring and enabling young women to reach their full potential in a safe, healthy and fun environment. Our program and activities are firmly rooted in an appreciation for our natural surroundings, the develpment of athletic skill and respect for one another as individuals. We recognize and promote the values of integrity, leadership, grace, compassion and character in every camper.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71.1%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.4; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71.1% of revenue deployed · 82% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.