Mississippi Heritage Trust
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 582020318
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Cleveland, MS, USA
- Phone
- 6013540200
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $667,256
- Expenses
- $513,172
- Assets
- $1,134,786
- Liabilities
- $91,681
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
42 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AMBER MORTON (PAST PRESIDENT)
- WILL JONES (PRESIDENT)
- PAGE OGDEN (VICE PRESIDENT)
- HELEN RASH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-NONVOTI)
Highest reported compensation
- HELEN RASH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR-NONVOTI): $80,174 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mississippi heritage trust works to save and renew places meaningful to mississippians and their history.
What it reported doing in 2024
Board and staff development held eight executive committee meetings and four full board meetings. Held a new board member orientation.educational outreach printed and distributed 5,000 copies of the summer 2024 issue of elevation, the journal of the Mississippi heritage trust. Worked with the national trust for historic preservation on advocacy for the federal historic tax credit during preservation advocacy week. Spoke with civic groups about the Mississippi heritage trust and the importance of historic preservation. Spoke with numerous statewide media outlets about the Mississippi heritage trust and preservation issues. Hosted an annual historic preservation conference and heritage awards in vicksburg. Membership sent out membership renewal and thank-you letters in december. Hosted an annual membership meeting.local preservation assistance worked with communities on local preservation issues. Prepared letters of support for preservation organizations and projects across the state, including supporting local preservation efforts, recommending projects for grants, etc. Attended public meetings to advocate for historic preservation issues.preservation partners worked closely with state partners including the Mississippi department of archives and history and the Mississippi main street association to promote historic preservation across the state.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 58.5%; rating input score 58
- Program expense ratio: 74.2%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: $81.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 23.1%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 58.5% of revenue deployed · 74.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 39 of 39 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $381K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 42 people listed
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.