Centerville Washington History

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
316078472
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Centerville, OH, USA
Phone
9372912223
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$183,323
Expenses
$146,041
Assets
$790,217
Liabilities
$1,645

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CYNTHIA L BURNS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PT YEAR)
  • VERONICA OSTER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PT YEAR)
  • ED ROSS (PRESIDENT)
  • PHIL KERN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CYNTHIA L BURNS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PT YEAR): $15,289 total reported compensation
  • VERONICA OSTER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PT YEAR): $3,932 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to connect community to its heritage by collecting preserving interpreting & promoting the history of our local area.we provide means of disseminating educational materials regarding historical heritage &access for researchers & public to items of historic signific

What it reported doing in 2025

Museum operations and historic buildings: asahel wright historic property/museum and visitor center for free historic walking tours designed to educate commmunity on local history and provide sense of lifestyle and work requirements in early times. Historic properties demonstrate use of limestone resources found in quarries located in area and their uses in local structures. Aaron nutt cottage is home of one of areas founders and is used as archival storage and research center by students, historians, writers. It contains displays of period antique furniture from earliest settlement of area. Museum in walton house contains exhibitis of clothing, home implements, tools, furniture and textiles from early settlement of area. The walton house is an historic structure itself and one of original buildings in centerville area. In process is solicitation for grants&other funding for construction of an Ohio rural education center using period materials.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $47.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.3%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.41; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.6% of revenue deployed · 72.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $106K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $15K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.