Heritage Foundation of Williamson County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237042596
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Franklin, TN, USA
Phone
6155918500
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,227,241
Expenses
$8,427,126
Assets
$32,010,880
Liabilities
$15,137,941

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARI BEASLEY (CEO AND PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BARI BEASLEY (CEO AND PRESIDENT): $284,115 total reported compensation
  • CYNTHIA A STILELOW (EMPLOYEE): $135,631 total reported compensation
  • RONALD E DILTS (EMPLOYEE): $107,427 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 organization is dedicated to protecting and preserving the communitities and cultural heritage of historic resources in williamson county, Tennessee, and works with area leaders to continually care for historic spaces, treasured landmarks, and cherished local businesses.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provides tours of historical homes, sponsors festival and holiday events, sells books of local historical buildings, landmarks and landscapes in the city of franklin and williamson county, Tennessee. The organization has programs to help protect local historical landmarks in the area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.3%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 63.4%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.8; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.3% of revenue deployed · 63.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $284K · 26 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $128K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.