Teal Lost Land and Ghost Lakes Improvement Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
916504972
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Hayward, WI, USA
Phone
8152890140
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,192
Expenses
$59,640
Assets
$191,984
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN KROLL (PRESIDENT)
  • CRAIG PAGENKOPF (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KEVIN KROLL (PRESIDENT)
  • CRAIG PAGENKOPF (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PERRY COWAN (TREASURER)

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

To provide a forum for communication that fosters support and volunteer action to maintain ecosystem entigrity, good water quality, good fishing, aesthetically pleasing recreational experiences in teal, lost land and ghost lakes.

What it reported doing in 2025

Teal, lost land & ghost lakes improvement association manages invasive species by working with the Wisconsin department of natural resources (dnr) to manage the spread of eurasian water milfoil (ewm) throughout our lakes, which crowd out native species. The association monitors and improves water quality. Dedicated volunteers regulary test water quality to assess it and suggest ways to keep the water clear and clean.

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. 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: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.6%; rating input score 59
  • 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.22; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -75.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -39.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.6% of revenue deployed · 57.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $34K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.