Schroon Lake Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133182165
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Schroon Lake, NY, USA
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,172
Expenses
$7,782
Assets
$154,380

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Ireland (President)
  • Glen Repko (Vice President)
  • Roger Friedman (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Scott Ireland (President)
  • Glen Repko (Vice President)
  • Roger Friedman (Vice 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

The Schroon Lake Association a volunteer-based nonprofit has safeguarded the Schroon Lake watershed for a century. Our mission is to preserve the lakes beauty and health educate the public and collaborate with like-minded individuals to benefit residents visitors and the regions economic vitality.

What it reported doing in 2025

Monitor and manage water quality in Schroon Lake: Survey for eurasian milfoil curly leaf pondweed and other invasive spoecies working with other lake associations. Support lake friendly activities. Support Center for Loon Conservation. Expenses are part of Lines 10 13 and 16.

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

MIXED - 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: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.9%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 57.6%; rating input score 58

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 79.1%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.84; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -22.7% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.2% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.9% of revenue deployed · 57.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 20/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.