The Andover Community Hub

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237193280
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Andover, NH, USA
Phone
6037355509
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$71,219
Expenses
$43,475
Assets
$319,751
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Susan Chase (Chair, Board of Directors)
  • Kathy Ordway (Vice Chair, Board of Directors)
  • Dana Swenson (Treasurer, Board of Directors)

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

To help nurture and enhance a more vibrant, resilient and sustainable local community, to encourage a sense of belonging and personal investment in the town and to revive Andover's historic old Town Hall as a place for people of all ages to gather for social, educational, cultural, recreational and economic activities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Community support: Collections to support the community and those less well-off through the Giving Tree at the holidays ($4,800 worth of gift cards collected and distributed through the school and town offices), warm coats and mittens (approx. 100 coats passed to local food pantry), similar Back to School supplies collection; organization of Earth Day town road-side trash pick-up and collection for recycling of plastic plant pots; town beautification efforts through the organization's Garden Club; providing space for other community groups to meet in our facility, including other non-profits, town committee meetings, occasional use by school to provide individual services, etc. No costs other than indirect costs to keep the heat and lights on in the building.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.4%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 33.8%; rating input score 34
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 14th 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: 39%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.35; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.7% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 21.4% of revenue deployed · 33.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 17 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.