Victoria Preservation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742181473
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Victoria, TX, USA
- Phone
- 3615731878
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Historical Societies & Historic Preservation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $64,339
- Expenses
- $80,038
- Assets
- $102,039
- Liabilities
- $822
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SUSAN MORRISON (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JEFF WRIGHT (EXECUTIVE DI)
- SUSAN MORRISON (PRESIDENT)
- JOHN MORAIDA (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To foster the preservation, protection, and development of historically significant artifacts and properties in the natural and build environment of victoria county through education, advocacy, and acquistions; and to perpetuate those customs which enrich the community life of victoria county.
What it reported doing in 2024
Preservation of historically significant buildings, public education through programs, publications and tours to promote the preservation of buildings from the past.
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 96
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 88
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -24.4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 26.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $70K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.