National Trust for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237128119
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
United Kingdom, Wiltshire, UK
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$898,624,000
Expenses
$972,929,000
Assets
$2,481,522,000
Liabilities
$390,057,000

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Hilary McGrady (Director General): $277,124 total reported compensation
  • Harry Bowell (Director of Land and Nature): $172,898 total reported compensation
  • Andy Beer (Director of Strategy and Places): $170,937 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 National Trust was formed in 1895 to promote the permanent preservation for the benefit of the nation of lands and tenements including buildings of beauty and historic interest. It has since grown into Europes biggest conservation organisation.

What it reported doing in 2024

This comprises recurring expenditure on properties held for preservation including 700 + miles of coastline and 600 + acres of land of outstanding natural beauty and 300 + historic houses ancient monuments gardens nature reserves and parks its coast countryside and garden properties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 81% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.55; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.2%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.7% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $868.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $277K · 12 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $67.1M reported
  • Consistency: 46 of 47 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.