Edmonds South Snohomish County Historical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237309955
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Edmonds, WA, USA
Phone
4257740900
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$257,777
Expenses
$289,223
Assets
$556,316
Liabilities
$99,112

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ARNOLD LUND (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW MIKLOS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BARB FAHEY (PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALLYSON AVIS (COLLECTIONS MANAGER): $58,848 total reported compensation
  • POLLY YORIOKA (MUSEUM CURATOR): $31,841 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Esschs is a society dedicated to sharing the history of our community. We will achieve this by: research; collection and preservation of historical documents, artifacts, memories, and events; and by utilizing interpretive displays and engaging in creative public education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community engagement: the society operates a museum in the nationally registered carnegie library building in edmonds. Admission is free. The museum offers permanent and rotating displays reflecting the southwest snohomish county area. There is programming that is designed for families, and that supports local school groups. The society partners with the city, local nonprofits, and other groups to make history relevant to today's community though activities such as the indigenous walking tour and events sponsored by the chamber of commerce. Estimated expenses include the salary for the part-time museum curator, and the costs of creating exhibits and providing community programming.typical examples of society activities include: a children's activity center was created, and edmonds museum activity/coloring books were distributed free of charge. They contain the history of edmonds, along with pictures of familiar historic places. Historic crafts and other programming were offered throughout the year.the society partnered with the edmonds wine walk program, porchfest, halloween, the holiday tree lighting, and the indigenous walking tour and provided the opportunity for thousands of people to learn from and enjoy the museum and the carnegie library building that houses it. Pop-up exhibits were provided around town (e.g., the edmonds sno-isle library). The society partnered with the edmonds school district to host hundreds of children for tours, and to provide travel exhibits for use in classrooms. The society supported local historians to create articles published in the local papers. It supported a local filmmaker to create a movie edmonds history that was shown at the local theater. It publishes an enewsletter that keeps the community informed about local activities and uses social media to educate the public about local history.the society offered a spot during the edmonds summer market to the edmonds food bank to receive donations of food/cash, thus creating an atmosphere to engage thousands of shoppers with serving the food insecure community. A booth was also provided for a different community non-profit each saturday through the market, and the society conducted fundraising for a future county fire and public safety museum. The society donating $500 to the asian service center of edmonds for sponsorship of their annual event.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 21
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 26th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.92; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $257K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.