Save Chebacco Trails & Watershed Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863091946
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
South Hamilton, MA, USA
Phone
6175122299
Rating
34
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,314
Expenses
$10,552
Assets
$6,549
Liabilities
$287,500

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENNETH WHITTAKER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN COLE (TREASURER/DIRECTOR)
  • HILARY COLE (CLERK/DIRECTOR)
  • KENNETH WHITTAKER (PRESIDENT)

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

Focused on preserving and protecting the forest, watershed, wildlife habitat and trail network of a large area of fragile land known as 133 essex street hamilton, ma from development and have it sell to a local land trust.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, the organization successfully achieved all of its organizational objectives related to the preservation of the chebacco property. Following sustained community advocacy and conservation efforts, the developer withdrew all proposals to construct condominium units on the site. Subsequently, the property owners sold the land to greenbelt at a substantially reduced price, ensuring the permanent protection and preservation of this environmentally significant property for future generations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.3%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 43.9; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -114.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -54.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.