Train Collectors Association Fort Pitt Division C/o Robert Coon
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 251672186
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Phone
- 4123660261
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $68,608
- Expenses
- $44,712
- Assets
- $340,283
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAVE MATTHEWS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- DAVE MATTHEWS (PRESIDENT)
- ROBERT COON (TREASURER)
- GEORGE STARZ (VICE PRESIDE)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
A. To search out, preserve and communicate information pertaining to the history of the tinplate trains and to advance the hobby of collecting and operating these trains and items customarily associated with them. B. To promote fellowship and the free exchange of information among members by holding meetings, conducting activities and programs, publishing periodicals and other literature, and otherwise providing educational and informational material not only to members of the division, but also to national tca, historians, educators and other interested persons. C. To promote the standards established by national tca for the hobby of collecting and operating tinplate trains and related items.
What it reported doing in 2025
Refer to organization's mission statement-schedule o
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 64
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.3%; rating input score 48
- Program expense ratio: 92.1%; rating input score 92
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 34.8%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.61; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 48.3% of revenue deployed · 92.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.