Marshfield Historical Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046186884
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Marshfield, MA, USA
Phone
7818340100
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,362
Expenses
$12,692
Assets
$662,827
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID WELCH (PRESIDENT)
  • CINDY CASTRO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALLEN UHLER (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • PAUL BOWERS (DIRECTOR)
  • JANE DAVIDSON (DIRECTOR)
  • TIMOTHY DAVIDSON (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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Preserve historic structures; collect, display and preserve artifacts, archives and photographs; and educate and inform the public about the history of marshfield through open houses, guest lectures, & host cultural/historical events.

What it reported doing in 2018

Lectures & events

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22.5%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 52.22; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $13K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.