Garrett-jacobs Mansion Endowment Fund Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521795790
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4105396914
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$427,300
Expenses
$64,119
Assets
$1,114,869
Liabilities
$312,147

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CARL E EASTWICK (PRESIDENT)
  • FRANK DITTENHAFER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • J BITNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • J BITNER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $152,975 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the garrett-jacobs mansion endowment fund is to preserve and restore the mansion as a national historic landmark and to share the history, architectural and civic legacy of the mansion for the benefit and education of the public.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 1992, the garrett-jacobs mansion endowment fund (gjmef), a 501(c)(3)organization, was formed; its sole mission is to preserve the architectural and historical character of this important and unique structure. The ongoing rehabilitation preserves the mansion as a cherished artifact from another age and returns it to its rightful role as a gathering-place for social, business and civic functions. A "friends of the mansion" public membership program brings additional financial support to the mansion and welcomes visitors to enjoy its beauty and programs. The engineers club and the endowment fund work cooperatively to present concerts, theatrical performances, symposia and other educational programs to which the public are invited. The endowment fund's distinguished advisory council, made up of museum professionals, historians, architects and preservationists, advises the mansion on fulfilling its educational mission, with a particular focus on baltimore's gilded age. We have established partnerships and other collaborations with cultural resources and historic sites in mount vernon and throughout the city. Our programs have cemented strong partnerships with the walters art museum, Maryland historical society and other important institutions. Our membership in the greater baltimore history alliance helps us build partnerships with historic homes and small history museums throughout the region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 85%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.39; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.