Buffalo Niagara Heritage Village

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161470517
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Amherst, NY, USA
Phone
7166891440
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$589,191
Expenses
$714,145
Assets
$368,782
Liabilities
$21,058

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL TYRPAK (PRESIDENT)
  • EMILY HOCKWATER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CARRIE STIVER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARRIE STIVER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $81,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To instill, educate, and cultivate in a public audience an informed appreciation of the american past and its impact on current lifestyles, culture, and historical development of the town of amherst, including the village of williamsville. Additionally, bnhv's mission, programs, and exhibits focus on presenting the history of agriculture and rural community in western New York, with an emphasis on the story of amherst.

What it reported doing in 2025

Buffalo niagara heritage village maintains a 35-acre campus and our historic village contains ten restored historic buildings built during the 19th century allowing visitors to experience what life was like in the buffalo niagara region during an earlier era. The indoor museum features rotating exhibits, the amherst library and reading room, and a collection of 40,000+ artifacts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 78% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 57.3%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -21.2%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 57.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $409K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $81K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.