Watershed Conservation Resource Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810594071
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Fayetteville, AR, USA
Phone
4794441916
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,553,347
Expenses
$3,638,129
Assets
$3,234,843
Liabilities
$858,690

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SANDI FORMICA (VICE-CHAIRMA): $185,919 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW VAN EPS PE (TREASURER/SE): $152,326 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The watershed conservation resource center strives to protect, conserve, and restore natural resources by utilizing the watershed approach, environmental outreach, and providing planning and technical assistance to landowners, communities, and government.

What it reported doing in 2025

The center provides technical and planning servicesfor the protection, conservation, and restoration of watershed resources for the well being of communities and society. The center provides specialized assistance concerning watershed resource issues to a variety of organizations including watershed groups; local, state, and federal governments; non- profit organizations; conservation districts; and other entities requiring assistance.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $61.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.1%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.8% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.