National Association of Tribal Historic Preservati

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742893040
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2026288476
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,345,784
Expenses
$2,861,060
Assets
$1,713,845
Liabilities
$36,126

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Valerie Grussing (Executive Director)
  • Ira Matt (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Valerie Grussing (Executive Director): $136,617 total reported compensation
  • Melissa Madrigal (Operations Director): $116,630 total reported compensation
  • Amy Martinez (Finance Director): $104,614 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

NATHPOs mission is to provide guidance to preservation officials, elected representatives, and the public about national historic preservation legislation, policies and regulations.

What it reported doing in 2025

NATHPO supports Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOs) in their work to preserve and protect Native American cultural heritage. In 2025, NATHPO administered cooperative agreements, provided technical assistance, conducted training, and managed the Protecting Native Places (PNP) regranting program, distributing $1,000,000 in grants to 25 tribal nations to support heritage preservation projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 42nd 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.6; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $137K · 17 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $163K reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 32 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 25 filed related-organization links
  • 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 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.