Minnesota Supreme Court Historical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262248155
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Chisago, MN, USA
Phone
6124741433
Rating
93
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,068
Expenses
$43,355
Assets
$73,851
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KATIE BARRETT WIIK (DIRECTOR)
  • BRIAN BELL (DIRECTOR)
  • CHARLES BIRD (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We work to preserve the history of the Minnesota supreme court and court of appeals through recording oral histories of recently retired justices and judges assisting judges with compiling their career books and professional documents recording commemorative events such as investitures, programs, and reunions

What it reported doing in 2024

A. 3 x 2-hour cles b. 40th anniversary court of appeals reunion (cle + reception) c. Mondale-quie essay contest (awarded $2250 in prizes and held an award luncheon for the winners and their families) d. Court of appeals 40th anniversary symposium (large, full-day event with local and national speakers and a reception following) e. Justice jeopardy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for member benefits.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -44.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.7; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 98.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $38K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.