East Blue Hill Library Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222557445
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Blue Hill, ME, USA
Phone
2073745577
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$49,833
Expenses
$29,104
Assets
$807,289
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Katherine D Marsh (President)
  • Lynda Moulton (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Katherine D Marsh (President)
  • Lynda Moulton (Vice President)
  • Judith Ball (Secretary)

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

Operate and maintain a public library for the village of East Blue Hill. Sponsor events to promote literacy, reading, and enjoyment of literature. Provide a center for community events that encourage social interaction and fellowship.

What it reported doing in 2025

Maintained and operated the East Blue Hill Public Library, circulating books and providing a repository for historical records of the village. Open six days a week. Served approximately 250 families.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 26.2%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 29.2%; rating input score 29
  • Fundraising efficiency: $45.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 41.6%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 27.74; rating input score 86; 86th 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: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 26.2% of revenue deployed · 29.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $8K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 26/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.