Groton School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042104265
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Groton, MA, USA
Phone
9784483363
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$66,947,623
Expenses
$58,297,149
Assets
$703,509,165
Liabilities
$63,425,967

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Benjamin N Pyne (President)
  • Gary C Hill (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Temba Maqubela (Headmaster): $1,074,459 total reported compensation
  • John MacEachern (Director of Development): $571,428 total reported compensation
  • John Herlihy (Chief Financial Officer): $392,432 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Groton School's mission is to inspire lives of character, scholarship, leadership, and service within a diverse, inclusive, and close-knit community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education of 381 students in grades eight through twelve in a non-profit, co-educational college preparatory boarding school. The School provides aid assistance for 41% of its students in the form of tuition grants, housing support, travel assistance, and subsidies for books, supplies, and laptop purchases.

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 80% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.5%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 70.5%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.3%; rating input score 96; 51st 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.9%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.07; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.5% of revenue deployed · 70.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 26 of 27 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $41.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.1M · 33 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $7.2M reported
  • Consistency: 48 of 49 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 13 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.