9-11 Memorial Garden of Reflection

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452432779
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Yardley, PA, USA
Phone
6099777893
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$328,477
Expenses
$63,550
Assets
$3,226,391
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • FIONA HAVLISH (TRUSTEE)
  • JIM MCCAFFREY (SECRETARY)
  • BRIAN MCCLOSKEY (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. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To maintain the official pa garden of reflection to the victims of the september 11, 2011 terrorist attacks; for the educational and remembrance purposes benefitting current and future generations and related activities; support from community organizations and leaders, family members and the participation and generosity of the general public. The organization pursues its activities to provide the following: 1. Raise money to build an endowment capable of generating sufficient annual funds to ensure maintenance of the garden of reflection. 2. Provide the organizational leadership necessary to conduct the annual september 11th day of remembrance held at the garden of reflection that includes educational activities for the general public in addition to memorial services honoring the lives of the victims of 9/11.

What it reported doing in 2025

Used to maintain and preserve the garden of reflection 9-11 memorial.

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 - 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: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 92
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.2%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 80.7%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 50.77; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 36% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.2% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.