Nantucket Preservation Trust Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043394648
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Nantucket, MA, USA
Phone
5082281387
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,103,549
Expenses
$541,624
Assets
$1,868,447
Liabilities
$148,049

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON KING (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM MOFFETT MOORE (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTIAN HOFFMAN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY BERGMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY BERGMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $165,988 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To educate and encourage property owners as to what is possible to preserve and protect the historical elements of their properties and to raise awareness of the community about the value of and need for historic architectural preservation.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization encourages community action and support by publishing newsletters and by maintaining a web site. The organization also obtains preservation easements and is involved with walking tours of nantucket and other educational projects. They also conduct various historical research projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 85% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.2%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 61.2%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 50.9%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.45; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.2% of revenue deployed · 61.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $331K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.