Starved Rock Historical & Educational Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363813257
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Utica, IL, USA
Phone
8156675356
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$96,519
Expenses
$64,177
Assets
$138,341
Liabilities
$382

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Matthew Klein (President)
  • Mike Toohey (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Pamela Grivetti (Chairman Emeritus)
  • Frank Borkowsky (Director)
  • Robbin Keenan (Director)

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 Starved Rock Historical and Educational Foundation uses all volunteers to do their educational programs and operate their gift store in the Visitor Center. All income is made through the sales made in the gift shop, donations and membership dues. The income is used for educational programs for the visitors of Starved Rock State Park and to purchase items that are then donated to the State of Illinois for use at Starved Rock State Park.

What it reported doing in 2025

To facilitate Visitor Center programs that include conservation and recreation.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Liabilities are high compared with assets and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.5%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.16; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $64K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.