Reading Antiquarian Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046116066
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Reading, MA, USA
Phone
7819442957
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,208
Expenses
$9,879
Assets
$667,586
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Virginia D Blodgett (President)

People named in this filing

  • Virginia D Blodgett (President)
  • Everett A Blodgett (Treasurer)
  • Ellen Terry (Secretary)

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

Maintaining the National Historic Register 1694 saltbox house called Parker Tavern and the lifestyle of the families and Town during the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries by collecting preserving and presenting historical artifacts through programs and events.

What it reported doing in 2024

Parker Tavern was open to the public, free of charge, for tours of the building and grounds every Sunday 2-5pm from the beginning of May to the end of October. New special exhibits were changed and presented during that time. For example: Farming in Reading; the Process of archiving new acquisitions; and Rev 250: maps and events and the new Colonial and Revolutionary markers in the Laurel Hill Cemetery.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

MIXED - 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: 10
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8.5%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 16
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: 57.4%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 67.58; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8.5% of revenue deployed · 16.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.