New Hampshire Public Broadcasting

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943443883
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Durham, NH, USA
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Radio

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,965,976
Expenses
$6,929,590
Assets
$11,180,270
Liabilities
$1,359,559

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER FRID (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PETER FRID (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $167,845 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

New Hampshire public broadcasting engages minds, connects communities and celebrates New Hampshire.

What it reported doing in 2024

New hampshires only statewide locally owned and operated television network engages minds, connects communities and celebrates New Hampshire with programs that entertain, educate and enrich. Beyond its award-winning local and national television programs, nhpbs is a leader in educationand community outreach. For more than half a centry, nhpbs has provided award-winning locally focused and produced television programs, pbs and independently produced programs that engage, eductate and enrich the lives of everyone in the community. Nhpbs original programming captures the people, places and issues of the granite state. Nhpbs production activities align with its community outreach. Local program productions have included windows to the wild, granite state challenge, and our hometown.nhpbs is recognized as a partner and connector by other eductional and nonprofit organizations. Through programs and eductional

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.6%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 58.6%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.61; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.6% of revenue deployed · 58.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 23 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 23 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $987K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 34 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.