Red Wing Property Conservation Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300232185
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- St Paul, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6512245463
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $45,383
- Expenses
- $64,067
- Assets
- $253,639
- Liabilities
- $399
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- SILAS B FOOT (CHAIR AND TREASURER)
- MARYBESS GOEPPINGER (VICE CHAIR)
- VICKIE RIESTER (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To further the charitable, scientific, or education purposes of saint paul and Minnesota foundation and in particular by preserving the heritage and enhancing the community of red wing through the preservation of historical property and education of the community on the significance of such historical property.
What it reported doing in 2024
Maintenance and operation of historic train depot in red wing, mn. The train depot is also home to one nonprofit organization that rents space in the depot at below market rates. The nonprofit is the red wing arts association.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 98
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 94.3%; rating input score 94
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -41.2%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.96; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $60K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.