Rotch-jones-duff House and Garden Museum Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042859088
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New Bedford, MA, USA
Phone
5089971401
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Museum, Museum Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$722,415
Expenses
$584,216
Assets
$4,519,110
Liabilities
$94,546

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NATALIE MELLO (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA BARNES (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • NATHANAEL BRAYTON (ASSISTANT TREASURER)
  • AMELIA ALBURN (TRUSTEE)
  • STEWART YOUNG (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Rotch-jones-duff house & garden museum enlivens new bedford's history, engages our communities, and enriches cultural understanding through stewardship, education and entertainment.

What it reported doing in 2025

The rotch jones duff house and museum was able to hold, restore, preserve, and maintain the house and gardens, recapture and preserve the special quality of life which flourished while the three families lived in the house, interest the public in local history through the interpretation and dissemination of information using educational and cultural programs, and make the property accessible to the public.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.1%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.1%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.74; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.1% of revenue deployed · 56.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $331K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.