GLCAC Support Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852718752
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Lawrence, MA, USA
Phone
9786814900
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,000
Expenses
$439,219
Assets
$11,694,154
Liabilities
$10,290,000

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Vilma Martinez-Dominguez (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Vilma Martinez-Dominguez (President): $196,302 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To raise funds and support the functions of and carry out the purposes of Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc. ("GLCAC").

What it reported doing in 2024

To raise funds and support the functions of and carry out the purposes of Greater Lawrence Community Action Council, Inc. ("GLCAC") so long as GLCAC continues to be organized and operated for exempt purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the code, engage in activities and perform functions that glcac would otherwise have to perform; own, lease and maintain the site or sites at which GLCAC is located, otherwise benefit, through the provision of financial support and services, GLCAC; and engage in any lawful act or activity in furtherance of the foregoing, provided such activities are not in violation, or inconsistent with, the corporation's status as a charitable organization under section 501(c)(3) of the code.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10,880.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 26.62; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.88; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 83.4% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -112.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $439K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.