Friends of No 9 Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830941853
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Novato, CA, USA
Phone
4153027677
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$87,005
Expenses
$4,048
Assets
$537,009
Liabilities
$22,700

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Fred Runner (President)
  • Roger Smith (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Fred Runner (President)
  • Roger Smith (Vice President)
  • Eric Macris (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Friends of Number 9 seeks to acquire, restore, conserve and display the last piece of historic railway stock for the Mount Tamalpais and Muir Woods Railway.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, Friends of No 9 accomplished major portions of the locomotive restoration. Initially, the focus was on disassembling the locomotive boiler, frame, wheel trucks and the V-twin 2-cylinder engine. Some of the bolts had to be individually drilled out to separate key components. Metal was cut away that could not be restored, parts were media-blasted to remove surface rust. Assembled pieces were riveted to match historic patterns, then painted with primer and two coats of marine epoxy paint. The boiler got a new jacket over foam insulation. The firepan was rebuilt, a mix of original and new materials. Historic parts were obtained for brakes, lubricators and water injectors, as well as controls and lights. By the end of 2024, the boiler, tender and cab were remounted on the frame. A new pilot was commissioned to conform to the mountain operation in 1921 that had been removed for logging operations. Reassembly was completed mid-2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% 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

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: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 4.3%; rating input score 4
  • Program expense ratio: 50%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 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: 95.3%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 132.66; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 4.3% of revenue deployed · 50% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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 4/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.