National Society United States Daughters of 1812

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
530116360
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027451812
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$470,984
Expenses
$298,204
Assets
$2,311,813
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Cheryl M Sesma (President National)
  • Sarah P Voll (2nd Vice President National)
  • Sandra R Wallis (1st Vice President National)
  • Beverly K Sterling-Affinati (4th Vice President National)
  • Kimberly K Nagy (3rd Vice President National)

People named in this filing

  • Cheryl M Sesma (President National)
  • Dena G Green (Corresponding Secretary National)
  • Sarah P Voll (2nd Vice President National)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To promote patriotism, preserve and increase knowledge of American history through historic preservation, commemorative events, patriotic education and maintain National Headquarters library and museum of 1784-1815 period memorabilia.

What it reported doing in 2025

Restoration, maintenance and operation of this organization's two historic properties, which includes a museum with collections focused on the 1784-1815 period, period rooms and furnishings, and a library for lineage research and collection of histories of the 1784-1815 period. The museum and library are available to members and the general public

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 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.8%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 59.9%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: $33.8 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 4.6%; rating input score 5; 41st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 36.7%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.75; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.8% of revenue deployed · 59.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $179K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 5/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.