Memphis Museums of Science & History

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
620801926
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Memphis, TN, USA
Phone
9016362370
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,165,441
Expenses
$5,702,066
Assets
$9,143,732
Liabilities
$587,982

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GWYN FISHER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DUNCAN GALBREATH (PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM THOMPSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TILL 12/12/25)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM THOMPSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TILL 12/12/25): $209,635 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 pink palace family of museums inspires people to learn how history, science, technology, and nature shape the mid-south. Through rich collections, thought-provoking exhibitions, and engaging programs, we encourage our diverse community to reflect (continued) (continued) on the past, understand the present, and influence the future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Memphis museum education programs -- giant screen theater featuring history, natural history, and science films; lichterman nature center featuring indoor exhibits and outdoor habitats with environmental education programs; pink palace education school and general audience programs; coon creek science center for school groups evacavating 73 million y.o. Fossils including university research and teacher training in partership with univ tn-martin; sharpe planetarium featuring educational astromony-related show for the public and school groups; and historic properties --educational programs and guided tours of the 1836 magevney house and the 1852 mallory-neely house. Programs include historic preservation projects; guided tours interpreting the homes, the people who lived in them, the furnishings, clothing, (continued) (continued) food, and social history as experienced through the residents of the houses. 332,905 persons benefitted.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 44.8%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.4%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.6% of revenue deployed · 44.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.