Preservation Chapel Hill

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237218278
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Phone
9199293233
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$116,318
Expenses
$299,404
Assets
$1,099,745
Liabilities
$3,178

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURIE NORMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • GARLAND HERSHEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PHILLIP LYONS (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LAURIE NORMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • GARLAND HERSHEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL FOX (TREASURER)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Preservation chapel hill is dedicated to protecting the character and heritage of the town of chapel hill, and the surrounding commuinty, through the preservation and conservation of its historic buildings and neighborhoods.

What it reported doing in 2024

Preservation chapel hill's (pch) approach to achieve its mission is three-fold: preserve, advocate, education. Pch advocates for preservation initiatives by encouraging projects that balance the need for development and growth with the desire to retain our historic resources. We work with partners in economic development, heritage tourism, public education, and local government to ensure a voice for historic preservation is present in the decision-making process. Pch educates the public and its partners about what historic preservation is and why it matters.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -157.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.67; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $256K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.