The Versailles Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237088677
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2129833436
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,483,762
Expenses
$1,451,242
Assets
$13,060,993
Liabilities
$2,284

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Barbara de Portago (President)

People named in this filing

  • Gillian Spreckles Fuller (Director)
  • Camila Koenig (Director)
  • Nicolas Calbos (Director)

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

The Organization supports the restoration and preservation of historical monuments and buildings at Versailles and at Giverny, France, and at other locations in France, the United States, and internationally. The Organization also supports the artist and volunteer programs on the premises of the painter Claude Monet's home and gardens.The Organization's President travels throughout the year to oversee current and ongoing restoration projects in France and Europe. Additionally, the President travels in the United States to review various programs which are French in origin, and to keep in close contact with the Organization's donors.All transfers of funds are monitored by the Organization's Board of Directors.

What it reported doing in 2025

The preservation, maintenance, and rehabilitation of the Chateau de Versailles, the Giverny Claude Monet Museum and Gardens and other historical monuments in France.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are large relative to annual expenses, but may not be spendable cash. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 49
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 71.3%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.2%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 71.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.