Spring Valley Historic Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272872215
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2014
- Location
- Spring Valley, IL, USA
- Phone
- 8156631004
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $23,425
- Expenses
- $14,384
- Assets
- $81,343
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- Tony Mautino (Trustee)
- Mike Campbell (Trustee)
- David Safranski (Trustee)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Spring Valley Historic Association shall collect, preserve and perpetuate the historic heritage of Spring Valley, Illinois, and of the records of the early settlers of the County and of the families of Spring Valley and Bureau County people and of the churches, schools and other institutions, and to arouse in the friends and citizens of the county an interest in its history; to encourage the love of local history in the youth of the Town and County; to foster and support investigation, study and research into the historical information pertaining to the Town and County; to publish, and disseminate historical information; and to encourage the preservation of historical sites and structures.
What it reported doing in 2024
To preserve the history and heritage of Spring Valley, Illinois, the people of the community organized a Society. The purpose of the Historical Society is to bring together people interested in history, especially the history of Spring Valley and the area and region surrounding and including Spring Valley, Illinois.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 38.6%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.66; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.