Trust for Architectural Easements

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311758303
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027975290
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$125,352
Expenses
$214,315
Assets
$3,280,309
Liabilities
$120,974

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Steven L McClain (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Steven L McClain (President): $78,080 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Trust will be a leading force in the preservation of America's architectural heritage. The Trust accepts donations of historic preservation easements to protect buildings.

What it reported doing in 2025

Stewardship Program: The Trust inspects each of the properties on which it holds an easement at least once every other year, and compares the condition of the property to baseline photographs on file to ensure that the property is in compliance with the terms of the easement. In 2018, the Trust monitored the properties for which an easement was granted between 2001 and 2010. No easement donations were accepted between 2011 and 2017. One easement donation was accepted in 2018. In addition, the Trust reviews and responds to change requests from owners seeking the Trust's consent, as required by the terms of the easement, to make alterations to their properties. The Trust's decisions regarding alterations conform with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. The Trust also tracks changes in ownership of easement-protected properties by reviewing land records and communicating regularly with property owners. Communications with potential buyers of easement-encumbered properties and their representatives reinforce the owner's obligations under the terms of the easement, as well as the Trust's rights and responsibilities vis a vis the properties. New owners are provided with a copy of the recorded easement, as well as information about the Trust's annual monitoring process and change request policies and procedures. Legal action is taken to defend the enforceability of the easements and to ensure compliance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 46.6%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -71%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.31; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.4%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -21% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 46.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $100K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.