Historic Rugby Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
620840267
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-PF 2020
Location
Rugby, TN, USA
Phone
4236282441
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$692,712
Expenses
$606,607
Assets
$4,476,640
Liabilities
$219,571

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

People named in this filing

  • RAFAELA BIELECKI-WEYENBERG (SECRETARY)
  • TIFFANY TERRY (MEMBER)
  • ANNE CARR (MEMBER)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Carry out and encourage, within the context of a living historic village, the restoration, preservation, protection, management and interpretation of the man-made and natural historic resources, and the british and appalachian heritage for the education and benefit of all people

What it reported doing in 2025

Interpreting the lifestyle of the original rugby colonists in an important program activity, sharing what it was like when victorian england came to the rural cumberlands of Tennessee. Period-dressed staff and volunteers help vistors attending one of the several special events step back in time to experience victorian english life in the colony. Traditional british fare is available in the harrow road cafe, an establishment that was advertising in the village newspaper as early as 1882. Several of the current menu offerings were available at the original cafe, which has been reconstructed to conform to rugbys historic archtecture. Vistors can also spend the night in the original newbury house, a boarding house that opened in 1880 and was in continuous operation until the 1920s. It was authentically restored in 1985, and offers guests the opportunity to spend the evening amid period antiques. Several other restored or reconstructed cottages are available.

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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.5%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $98.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 12.4%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.38; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.5% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $440K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.