Straus Historical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
134041199
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Smithtown, NY, USA
Phone
6317244487
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$151,874
Expenses
$121,035
Assets
$616,828
Liabilities
$41,389

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joan Adler (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Joan Adler (Executive Director): $44,600 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Societys mission is to foster the preservation and interpretation of cultural and historical matters pertaining to the settlement of Jews in the United States, with a particular focus on the family of Lazarus and Sara Straus. The Society conducts research, collaborates with individuals and institutions, and disseminates information through publications and public presentations to educate the public about their historical significance and contributions to American society.

What it reported doing in 2025

In carrying out its mission, the Society conducted research and exchanged information with individuals and organizations having an interest in the settlement of Jews in the United States, with a particular focus on the family of Lazarus and Sara Straus. The Society uses the history and contributions of the Straus family in government, commerce, and philanthropy as a framework for educating the public about broader themes in American history and the immigrant experience. During the year, the Society conducted historical research and collaborated with institutions and individuals to collect and share materials related to the Straus family, including participation in museum exhibitions and public presentations. The Society disseminated its research through newsletters, reports, educational seminars, and presentations at schools and public forums, and made materials available to researchers, authors, and students to support further study of American history. The Society continued its scholarship program, providing financial support to students consistent with its educational mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.8%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 70.4%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.3%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.1; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.8% of revenue deployed · 70.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $85K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.