Geneva Historical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
166233397
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Pennington, NJ, USA
Phone
8888663275
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$238,948
Expenses
$96,234
Assets
$3,040,912
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

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

Overview

Mission

To provide support for the geneva historical society to engage in an ongoing dialogue on geneva

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 59.7%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 31.6; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.3% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $79K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.