Bacon Free Library

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046060151
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Natick, MA, USA
Phone
5086536730
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Libraries

Reported finances

Revenue
$93,889
Expenses
$86,631
Assets
$1,254,046
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Richard Moon (Board Chair)
  • Kermit Baker (Treasurer and Trustee)
  • Karen Volinski (Clerk and Trustee)

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

The organization maintains a free and public library for the community. In accordance with the benefactor's will and trust, the library provides popular materials, learning resources, and programming for the enjoyment and use of the public, with a particular emphasis on supporting the educational needs of children.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization maintains a free and public library for the community. The organization and its predecessor trust have maintained a public and free library at the same location since 1880. The organization is responsible for the building (including furniture and fixtures and the collection) and the grounds, and some operations and programming expenses. The Town of Natick has supported some library operations since 1951. Currently, the Town employs the library director and staff, and these Town employees are responsible for library operations. The organization does not have any employees. When the Town pays wages and other expenses, such as utility bills and some of the materials and programming expenses, the Town pays those expenses directly, and does not pay them through the organization, or pay anything to the organization. Those expenses are the Town's, approved by Town meeting and processed through the Town finance function. As a result of the Town's direct payment of salaries and some expenses, the organization's program expenses shown on Form 990 are only a small fraction of total spending to operate the library. Further, the Occupancy costs shown on Form 990 appear artificially high compared with Program costs due to the Town's payment of certain program expenses.

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

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.7%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 14
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

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: 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.7%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.48; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.7% of revenue deployed · 13.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 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 24/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.