Stanwood Wildlife Sanctuary

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010277845
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ellsworth, ME, USA
Phone
2076678460
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Wildlife Sanctuary, Refuge

Reported finances

Revenue
$226,836
Expenses
$96,706
Assets
$1,286,387
Liabilities
$3,515

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Grayson Richmond (Executive Director)
  • Bonnie Hersey (President)
  • Penny Ricker (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Grayson Richmond (Executive Director): $45,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Operate a wildlife sanctuary and museum to perpetuate the memory spirit works and teachings of Cordelia J. Stanwood. Exhibits include historic and photographic plant life wildlife forestry and birds.

What it reported doing in 2025

The two hundred acre Sanctuary is available year round free of charge for walking skiing snowshoeing and photography on nature trails set amidst and preserving various pristine habitats for birds wildlife and the enjoyment of people easily accessible within the heart of Ellsworth. Many of these historic trails Cordelia J. Stanwood created in the early 20th century forming the first professional female ornithologist photographers outdoor laboratory, where she researched photographed and popularized her findings in magazines for 50 years. Maintaining over 4 miles of trails markers historic and educational signage building bridges while annually removing windfall and pruning new growth is a constant labor of love to preserve a healthy forest in multiple stages of growth supporting Maines wildlife for visitors and children. Estimate 3,000 walkers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.7%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 63.6%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $729.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.4%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.3; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 46.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.7% of revenue deployed · 63.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $62K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 42 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.