Friends of the Charlestown Navy Yard Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
331100681
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Charlestown, MA, USA
Phone
6172415134
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,979
Expenses
$17,891
Assets
$9,243
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lois Siegelman (President)

People named in this filing

  • David C Beane (Director)
  • Ryan Bedell (Director)
  • Paul Bergman (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Preservation of Charlestown Navy Yard

What it reported doing in 2025

Summer Solstice, Jazz Festival and Adaptive Sailing events to raise public awareness of and support the preservation of the Charlestown Navy Yard, a national historial landmark.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 58.7%; rating input score 59

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -49.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 32; 32nd 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 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.7% of revenue deployed · 58.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.