Mcloughlin Memorial Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930395578
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oregon City, OR, USA
Phone
5036565146
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$73,315
Expenses
$69,983
Assets
$639,856
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOAN WILLIAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BONNIE YOUNGBLOOD-WOLFE (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD MATTHEWS (PRESIDENT)
  • TARA SEAVER (PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KIRSTYN WALKER (TRUSTEE)
  • BOB HILL (TRUSTEE)
  • DOUG NEELEY (TRUSTEE)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of mcloughlin memorial association is to assist in the promotion of dr. John mcloughlin and his associates through education, interpretation, preservation, respect and appreciation of our heritage. To tell the story of oregons early government at the rose farm.

What it reported doing in 2024

To assist the national park service with programming at an historic site providing tours and classes while supporting the era and stories of dr. John mcloughlin and Oregon history. Also providing a source for media & art depicting the era to the public.

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 91% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 13th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th 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: 4.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.14; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.1% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 20 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $54K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.