Silver Woods Farms Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
993255185
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Armada, MI, USA
Phone
5863604994
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$528,530
Expenses
$39,384
Assets
$489,146
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LORY GREATHOUSE (DIRECTOR)
  • HEIDI NICHOLS (DIRECTOR/INC)
  • JOEY NICHOLS (DIRECTOR/INC)

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

The purpose or purposes for which the corporation is formed are: a. Our purpose is to provide a resource for education that values our heritage of agriculture and farming. We demonstrate animal husbandry and best farm practices with experiential learning. Our mission is to share god's instruction to be good stewards of the land and animals in our care as his creation. We want to honor him in all we do. We provide firearm instruction and training that encourages safety and preparedness, with respect for the rights granded in our 2nd amendment as responsible citizens. B. To receive and administer funds and to operate exclusively for charitable, religious, scientific, literary, or educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986, or comparable provisions of subsequent legislation (the "code"), and in particular the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under section 501(c)(3) of the code. C. To acquir

What it reported doing in 2024

As this is the initial organization year, the program expenses were all related to getting established. The expenses related to legal fees with establishing the not-for-profit organization, purchasing the horses and farm equipment, along with care for the horses, necessary to fulfill the mission. They have established the farm, animals, equipment in such a way to bring in groups of individuals to learn more about the heritage of agriculture and farming, animal husbandry and other related learning opportunities. These groups include: special needs groups, church groups, daycare groups, scout and school groups, and anyone in the public interested in learning more. The organization has extended outreach into the local communities by the directors, to make their new organization known and the opportunities available at their farm. Future goals include forming a group of volunteers, preparing a newsletter of what has been accomplished and future goals, creating a social media awareness, creating fundraising opportunities. They also include having future events, including themed wagon rides through the woods with presentations sharing a message; homesteading day; summer camps of varying lengths.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 38
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 41
  • Sustainability: 94
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8.9%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 50%; rating input score 50; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 92.5%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.42; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $39K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.