Gettysburg Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232969074
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Gettysburg, PA, USA
Phone
7173381243
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
History Museums

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,858,716
Expenses
$14,655,606
Assets
$104,640,532
Liabilities
$6,572,356

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACLYN SPAINHOUR (PRESIDENT/CEO (BEG. 1/25))
  • WAYNE E MOTTS (PRESIDENT EMERITUS/HISTORIAN)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANA MCDONALD (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $211,981 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN KLINZING (VP FOR PHILANTHROPY (LEFT 12/24)): $196,544 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN SHAFFER (VP OF FACILITIES): $169,985 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We are a 501(c)(3) non-profit philanthropic, educational organization operating in partnership with the national park service (nps) to preserve gettysburg national military park and the eisenhower national historic site, and to educate the public about their significance.

What it reported doing in 2024

Gettysburg national military park interpretive and office facilities include all expenses associated with providing facilities for the interpretation, storage, research and office space for the gnmp. The foundation also works closely with the gnmp and the national park service to preserve land, monuments and artifacts and to rehabilitate the land, returning the ground as closely as possible to its 1863 appearance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 67% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 97
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.1%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.7%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95%; rating input score 95; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.14; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.1% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $212K · 25 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.1M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.