Andover Historical Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 020366332
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Andover, NH, USA
- Phone
- 6037355232
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $93,908
- Expenses
- $24,038
- Assets
- $383,288
- Liabilities
- $285
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Charles Baer (Co-President)
- Jesse Schust (Co-President)
People named in this filing
- Charles Baer (Co-President)
- Jesse Schust (Co-President)
- Pam Cooper (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
Andover Historical Society's mission is to preserve the history of Andover, NH through the acquisition and conservation of property, artifacts, and stories, and to foster an awareness and appreciation for that history within the community.
What it reported doing in 2025
Through exhibits, collection items and the maintenance of local historical properties, the Society promotes knowledge and appreciation of the history of Andover, New Hampshire. During 2025, many of our visitors experienced: (1) the Potter Place Railroad Station built by the Northern Railroad in 1874, (2) tours of the Tucker Mountain Schoolhouse built by Benjamin Tucker in 1837, and (3) the Emons General Store. Other exhibits and events open to the public for viewing include: a Vermont caboose and a freight house and car, and the "Potter Place Festival".
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 93% 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 and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 39
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 83
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 20.5%; rating input score 21
- Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69
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: 74.4%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.95; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 20.5% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.