Ancient Egypt Research Associates Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363325468
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6177830737
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$705,845
Expenses
$670,474
Assets
$1,696,843
Liabilities
$17,997

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Mark Lehner (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Megan Lallier (Treasurer/Business Manager): $76,790 total reported compensation
  • Dr Mark Lehner (Executive Director): $41,854 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Using archeology and training to explore Egypt's past and empower young Egyptian archeologists.

What it reported doing in 2024

Giza and Cairo Center Project: The Cairo Center has been officially named The Mark Lehner Center. Located in Giza, Egypt, the Lehner Center is a compound of buildings that includes a villa containing the archives of over 25 years of field expeditions in Giza, Mit Rahina, and Luxor. It also houses a computer lab, lecture hall/library, laundry facilities, kitchen and staff quarters. The Lehner Center is meant to be the home of an archeological community that brings together archologists from Egypt and around the world in a mutually beneficial exchange of values and ideas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 63.5%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 5%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.53; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.4% of revenue deployed · 63.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $426K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 29 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.