Gateway Maryland Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520591577
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4103186780
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,722,285
Expenses
$12,272,911
Assets
$8,533,170
Liabilities
$816,481

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAY TURAKHIA (PRESIDENT)
  • PAUL MADDEN (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT (PART YEAR))
  • TED SZCZEPANIAK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ERIN LAMB (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ERIN LAMB (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $277,231 total reported compensation
  • DANA REINHART (EDUCATIONAL DIRECTOR): $139,196 total reported compensation
  • OLGA POLITES (DIRECTOR OF SPEECH): $128,994 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At the heart of Maryland, gateway stands as a beacon of hope, transformation, and inclusion. Formerly known as hasa, gateway embodies a mission that is as profound as it is personal: to change lives by ensuring everyone can understand and be understood. This purpose resonates deeply with the communities gateway serves, uniting individuals of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds through comprehensive communication services.

What it reported doing in 2024

The clinical services program provides speech, language, and hearing health services on gateway Maryland's main campus, at a satellite location, and throughout the greater baltimore region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

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: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 91.8%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -4.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.2% of revenue deployed · 91.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $277K · 29 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $142K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.