Port Washington Historical Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391720631
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Port Washington, WI, USA
Phone
2622689150
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$160,766
Expenses
$154,010
Assets
$1,385,474
Liabilities
$4,363

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NANCY HOLLEY (President)
  • BARBARA JOOSSE (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAWN ST GEORGE (EXEC DIRECTOR): $66,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Education, preservation, advancement and dissemination of knowledge of the history of the port Washington area. Our goal is to preserve the local history of port Washington and provide enriching education opportunities for all generations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ongoing restoration of the historic 1860 port Washington light station, tours are given to school age groups and the general public ( when available ). The light station is open to the public from may through october. A public kiosk provides information about port Washington's navigational lights was previously completed with the aid of an eagle scout.acquisition and preservation of artifacts and archival materials germane to the area surrounding and including port Washington wi are collected and displayed for educational and perservation.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.4%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 52%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -23.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.4% of revenue deployed · 52% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 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: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.