Mount Vernon Place Conservancy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263589281
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4109625070
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,296,478
Expenses
$1,030,101
Assets
$1,713,330
Liabilities
$34,528

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LANCE HUMPHRIES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • FAITH C MILLSPAUGH (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LANCE HUMPHRIES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $80,000 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 mount vernon place conservancy inc's mission is to be the full-time single management entity responsible for the historic restoration, oversight and protection of the Washington monument, along with maintenance and management of mount vernon place.

What it reported doing in 2024

Flower mart and monument lighting: as part of its year-round programming of mount vernon place, the conservancy present two annual city-wide festivals: flower mart and monument lighting. Flower mart is the oldest free public festival in the city of baltimore, having been founded in 1911. It celebrates spring during the first weekend of may with nearly 100 local vendors, musicians, and presenters. Monument lighting is over fifty years old, and is celebrated on the first thursday in december. It involves local music and food vendors with a finale of fireworks. Both large festivals involve complicated logistics, rentals, and staffing to present them free 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 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 71
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.2%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 20.5%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.66; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.2% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $897K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 17 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $213K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.