New Hampshire Center for Public Policy Studies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
020492883
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Merrimack, NH, USA
Phone
6032262500
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Social Science N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,555
Expenses
$125,165
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JAMES PUTNAM (DIRECTOR)
  • KATHERINE M HANNA (DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN HERNEY (DIRECTOR)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

True to its original charge, the center improved the quality of public policy debate in New Hampshire. In an era where civic discourse is dominated by spin, the center's thoughtful, non-partisan analysis was an increasingly important foundation to enable rational public policy debate. During its operation, the center provided information that matters.

What it reported doing in 2018

Community engagement (legislature, media, business community, non-profits) - producing original research and analysis was the foundation upon which all our work rests. The center was committed to sharing research and analysis with as wide a range of audiences as possible. We were regularly consulted by New Hampshire's leaders in public, private and non-profit sectors who sought our insight and expertise with strategic questions. We wound down operations early in 2018 and therefore delivered less than ten reports, programs and talies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% 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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 25%; rating input score 25
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -983.2%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.6% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 25% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.