Historical Society of the Episcopal Church

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
741277648
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Mineral Point, WI, USA
Phone
9203831910
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$195,731
Expenses
$221,173
Assets
$2,093,554
Liabilities
$630

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Runkle (1st Vice President)
  • Robyn Neville (2nd Vice President)
  • J Michael Utzinger (President)

People named in this filing

  • Lachlan Hassman (Director)
  • Edna Johnston (Director)
  • Daphne Noyes (Director)

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

The organization's objectives are to promote the preservation of the history of the Episcopal Church; to publish a peer-reviewed journal and related materials in support of this mission and similar scholarly work; to cooperate with other historical and archival organizations; and to encourage research, writing, and education concerning the history of the Episcopal Church.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization publishes Anglican and Episcopal History, a quarterly peer-reviewed journal distributed to members and subscribers. It also publishes The Historiographer, a quarterly newsletter produced jointly with affiliate organizations and distributed to members and subscribers.

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 84% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.6%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.47; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.6% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $176K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.