The Danvers Historical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046041458
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Danvers, MA, USA
Phone
9787771666
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$949,775
Expenses
$761,035
Assets
$1,716,663
Liabilities
$627,849

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID P MCKENNA (PRESIDENT)
  • DANIEL BENNETT (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID P MCKENNA (PRESIDENT)
  • DANIEL BENNETT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT B 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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The danvers historical society is dedicated to promoting the rich history of the original salem village, subsequently the town of danvers through preservation and the creation of engaging programs. The society aims to inspire individuals to join this mission, and create partnerships with those that share our dedication, so that together we can have a direct and positive impact on the local community, economy, and generations to come. Society programs preserve artifacts, buildings & architecture which have historical significance to danvers, ma. Also fosters appreciation through education and programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Programs preserve artifacts, buildings & architecture which have historical significance to danvers, ma.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 80% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.1%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd 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: 19.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.26; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.1% of revenue deployed · 69.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $526K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • 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 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.