Abram G Nesbitt Irr

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
246012417
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
6022247275
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,539
Expenses
$21,079
Assets
$350,914
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

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

Overview

Mission

Support for the Wyoming historical & geological society

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.65; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $5K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.