Shenandoah Valley Battlefields Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542007460
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New Market, VA, USA
Phone
5407404545
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,896,297
Expenses
$2,870,332
Assets
$74,697,504
Liabilities
$6,694,316

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVEN WALKER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVEN WALKER (CEO): $176,836 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 preserve, protect, and interpret the historic civil war battlefields, structures, and artifacts of the shenandoah valley.

What it reported doing in 2024

Preservation and interpretation of civil war battlefield sites: this including preserving approximately 7,700 acres of battlefield land throughout the shenandoah valley, and 22 historic structures, historic collections and artifacts from the civil war era are protected, cared for and preserved. The foudadtion provides grants for organizations participating in battlefield preservation and interpretation. The foundation's offices are located on the second floor of the historic strayer house in downtown new market, Virginia, in the heart of the shenandoah valley. A civil war orientation center small gift shop and visitor information center is located on the first floor. The foundation coordinates numerous volunteers who are engaged in the ongoing efforts. The foundation owns and operates a civil war museum in downtown winchester and a visitors center located at the third winchester battlefield.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.3%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 63.6%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.02; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.3% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.