The Lynnwood Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561987315
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7043754400
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies & Historic Preservation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,458,366
Expenses
$6,864,279
Assets
$26,852,164
Liabilities
$6,090,419

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER BLAIR (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PETER BLAIR (PRESIDENT & CEO): $352,724 total reported compensation
  • CHRYSTAL JOY (DIRECTOR - LEE INSTITUTE): $164,179 total reported compensation
  • RONDEL BALITAAN (GEN MGR - DUKE MANSION): $150,865 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The lynnwood foundation, a nonprofit organization established in 1996, has a twofold mission: to preserve and care for duke mansion, a national historic site, and operate lee institute. We preserve duke mansion as a nonprofit historic inn, gardens and meeting place making it accessible to the community and showcasing its history. Lee institute builds and transforms community by strengthening nonprofits, empowering leaders and engaging people.

What it reported doing in 2024

Duke mansion: the preservation and protection of duke mansion has continued with maintenance and capital investment of the house and grounds. Duke mansion showcases its history by being open to the community for all types of events and through permanent exhibits. The gardens are open nearly every day for visitors. It also provides its own annual programming free to the public including history lectures. During the pandemic, we did not provide our usual guided garden tours and an annual community-wide open house.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 81% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.34 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.91; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.3% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $353K · 31 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $2.3M reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.