Easter Seals Massachusetts Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042103867
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Worcester, MA, USA
Phone
5087516304
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Rehabilitative Medical Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,414,434
Expenses
$17,651,009
Assets
$30,591,810
Liabilities
$5,515,591

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

36 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL MEDEIROS (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL MEDEIROS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $274,517 total reported compensation
  • CHERYL LAZZARO (CFO & VP ADMINISTRATION): $198,362 total reported compensation
  • ERIC ODDLEIFSON (VP COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES): $147,165 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Easter seals Massachusetts is a statewide community-based organization that has been helping people with disabilities to live full and independent lives for over 75 years. Our mission is to provide services to ensure that children and adults with disabilities have equal opportunities to live, learn, work and play.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. Employment and training services - this program helps students and adults with disabilities develop the skills they need to get and keep jobs in today's competitive workplace. The program offers pre-employment job training services and individualized job placement. 2. College navigator provides individualized services to college students with disabilities based on their goals, strengths, and needs. Our navigators assist students in identifying barriers, advocating for the student's needs, and accessing college services and resources to reach graduation.3. Youth leadership - youth leadership program provides opportunities for young people with disabilities ages, 13 to 25, to develop their abilities and expand the possibilities they see for themselves.

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 90% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.7%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.7% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $14.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $275K · 36 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.