First Literacy Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042997446
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6174823336
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$669,780
Expenses
$769,794
Assets
$1,197,480
Liabilities
$196,706

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFFREY P BEALE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LAWRENCE FAHEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • THERESA B WITHERELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • THERESA B WITHERELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,387 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Funding innovation in adult literacy to change lives. We do this by: offering free best practice workshops for teachers and other adult education professionals; encouraging, supporting, and sharing innovative practices, curriculum and resources through our first literacy lab program grant initiative; and awarding scholarships and providing support for adult learners who are starting college.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarships and support for adult learners who have successfully completed basic studies in an abe program and are pursuing college or technical education are eligible for a first literacy scholarship. Recipients are awarded scholarships in recognition of their educational achievements and potential, their commitment to community service, and their resiliency and perseverance in the face of hardship. To sustain this ongoing learning community, we host scholar networking evenings, invite scholars to all first literacy events, ask interested scholars to speak at events, and first literacy representatives attend all community and educational events where our scholars are honored. We also look for ways in which we can more deeply involve the scholars with the broader community and cultural life of our city.

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 86% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 68.8%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86.3%; rating input score 86; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 22nd 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: -14.9%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.56; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 68.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 18 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $530K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 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: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.