Brighton Teachers Association Medical Expense Reimbursement Plan

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222440687
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
Phone
5852425050
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$261,959
Expenses
$162,004
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JEREMY TELLEX (TRUSTEE): $1,900 total reported compensation
  • JUDY WEGMAN (TRUSTEE/TREASURER): $1,900 total reported compensation
  • GEORGE SMITH (TRUSTEE): $1,900 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the voluntary employee benefit association is to defray medical expenses of teacher and administrator members of the brighton teachers association.

What it reported doing in 2014

Reimbursements of medical expenses to participant members

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 100% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: 38.2%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -64.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -40.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $139K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2011 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.