The Fort Ticonderoga Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141440924
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ticonderoga, NY, USA
Phone
5185852821
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,164,028
Expenses
$6,735,487
Assets
$33,375,202
Liabilities
$932,135

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BETH HILL (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BETH HILL (PRESIDENT & CEO): $475,989 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER RICHARDS (DIRECTOR OF FACILITIES): $156,404 total reported compensation
  • COLLEEN RICHARDS (TREASURER): $154,205 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule othe fort ticonderoga association's mission is to preserve, educate, and provoke an active discussion about the past and its importantance to present and future generations. We foster an on-going dialogue surrounding citizens, soldiers and nations through america's military heritage.

What it reported doing in 2025

Preserve, educate and provoke an active discussion of the past and its importance to present and future generations. Areas of focus include america's military heritage, specifically colonial and revolutionary war history. Program areas include public history, education, exhibitions, collections research and horticulture. Programs integrate all fort ticonderoga facilities including the museum located in the fort, archival and object collections, 27 historic structures, and 2,000 surrounding historic acres including carillon battlefield, mount defiance, mount hope and mount independence. Programs reach an international audience of more than 70,000 annually, more than 3,000 k-12 affiliate schools in all fifty states and 200 universities across the nation and globally. The digital reach was more than 46 million impressions in 2025 through social media channels, youtube videos and access to digital offerings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 63% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 82
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.9%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.96; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.9% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $476K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 51/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.