Polish Heritage Center at Panna Maria Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460561240
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Panna Maria, TX, USA
Phone
8303108612
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,230,464
Expenses
$1,042,329
Assets
$13,781,228
Liabilities
$365,408

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALICE R POORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RANDY PAWELEK (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALICE R POORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $79,167 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To retain and keep vibrant and relevant, the history, value, beliefs, customs and traditions of the polish settlers and their descendants at the first and oldest permanent polish settlement in america and to inspire, engage and educate visitors and descendants.

What it reported doing in 2024

The purpose of the polish heritage center is to preserve, to conserve, and to promote the heritage of panna maria, Texas, the first permanent polish settlement in the united states and to educate the descendants of the polish immigrations and general public about the history, culture, values, traditions of the original immigrants along with the efforts, feats, and accomplishments of the generations succeeding the original settlers and to maintain certain historical archives of panna maria, its immigrants, pioneers, and succeeding generations that are in the custody of the polish heritage center.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 54
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.4%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 65.9%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 15.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.22; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.4% of revenue deployed · 65.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $687K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.