Friends of the Holyoke Merry-go-round Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043034723
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Holyoke, MA, USA
Phone
4135389838
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$150,105
Expenses
$134,325
Assets
$933,781
Liabilities
$5,936

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH MCGIVERIN (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW MENARD (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOSEPH MCGIVERIN (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW MENARD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DANIELLE HAMEL (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To operate the former mountain park merry-go-round and maintain it in a specially constructed building in holyoke heritage state park into perpetuity for the enjoyment of all in the region, to further the economic revitalization of downtown holyoke, to preserve an object of rare beauty and superb early craftsmanship, to serve as a tourist attraction, and to be a symbol of high-spirited rejuvenation of the proud city of holyoke.

What it reported doing in 2024

Various activities to preserve and operate the holyoke merry-go-round.

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.
  • 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 10.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.95; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.9% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $115K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.