Patronato San Xavier
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742354509
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jul 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Tucson, AZ, United States
- Phone
- 520.407.6130
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,558,277
- Expenses
- $651,516
- Assets
- $4,603,189
- Liabilities
- $162,714
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MILES GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- CHARLIE PECK (PRESIDENT)
- ANNE BRECKENRIDGE BARRETT (VICE-PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MILES GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $116,650 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Patronato San Xavier funds and directs ethical conservation, conducts scientific research, and conveys the significance of Mission San Xavier del Bac, a National Historic Landmark in the community of Wa: k, part of the Tohono Oodham Nation. The Docent Program The Mission Docent Program began in 2011 and is directed by Patronato San Xavier, and constitutes the third strand of the organization’s mission; “conveying the significance of Mission San Xavier del Bac, a National Historic Landmark.” The docents provide thirty minute tours, six days a week. Tours highlight the Wa: k community prior to the arrival of the Spanish, the arrival of Fr Kino and the establishing of the Mission in 1692, and construction of main church in the late 1700s. Insights are provided about the architecture and building of the current church and the efforts of Patronato San Xavier to preserve it.
What it reported doing in 2024
Over the last four decades, over $15 million has been raised and invested in: 1. The conservation of san xavier del bac, an historic spanish colonial mission church (built between 1783 and 1797) and the ancillary buildings. Work includes: a. In the interior, the conservation and preservation of the original interior art which, following an initial cleaning and stabilization, requires ongoing maintenance treatments. B. On the exterior, removal of incompatible concrete-based plasters which had caused damage to the fired-adobe fabric of the building, and replacing with traditional lime plasters. C. Preservation of wooden elements throughout the structure to protect against insect and fungal damage, and damage created by exposure to sun and rain. D. A research phase on the next major conservation project, preservation of the historic facade, was undertaken in the fall of 2021 by a team led by the patronato's newly appointed conservation project manager, starr herr-cardillo. This information will be used to develop the protocols for the conservation of the facade; a project currently planned for the fall of 2024. E. Another set of original doors to the mission were conserved, and funding is in place for the third project involving wooden artifacts. The multi-year conservation in the west transept was completed in april 2022. This three-year endeavor has seen every surface from the dome to the floor cleaned, stabilized and conserved. Invasive portland cement was also removed at the floor level to prevent water infiltration f. Across the current period a major project was accomplished, completing preservation of the east tower, a project impacted by the loss of grant funding when the state of Arizona withdrew promised heritage grant moneys due to the recession and the state's own fiscal shortfall in 2009. This $1 million dollar project was largely completed on time and on budget utilizing a new vendor to the organization. 2. Maintaining a docent program to inform visitors about the history of the mission. This includes management of the small museum. 3. Funding an apprenticeship program, training young people in conservation and other related crafts. 4. Building an endowment to address on-going maintenance in perpetuity.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% 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
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: 44
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 30.6%; rating input score 31
- Program expense ratio: 56.3%; rating input score 56
- Fundraising efficiency: $37.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 58.2%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.07; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 30.6% of revenue deployed · 56.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $367K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $117K · 14 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 31/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.