Greater Lynn Senior Services
Legal name: Indian Rock Supportive Housing Inc C/o Greater Lynn Senior Services Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 542168612
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lynn, MA, USA
- Phone
- 781-599-0110
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $268,885
- Expenses
- $382,968
- Assets
- $2,642,844
- Liabilities
- $1,092,804
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KATHRYN BURNS (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KATHRYN BURNS (PRESIDENT): $254,270 total reported compensation
- KEVIN DERRIVAN (TREASURER): $228,543 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
GLSS is building healthier and more livable communities for all. Newsletter Sign up to get interesting news and updates from GLSS about senior care, health, and support. Click the button below and subscribe to our newsletter. 1** Mission Who** We Are Heralded for our cutting-edge approach to promoting consumer health and well-being, and overall community livability through a variety of new outcomes-driven programs, Greater Lynn Senior Services is the nonprofit Aging Services Access Point and Area Agency on Aging serving people age 60 and older and adults living with disabilities in Lynn, Lynnfield, Nahant, Saugus, and Swampscott, MA. Through our leadership role in Greater North Shore Link (formerly, the Aging and Disability Resource Consortium of the Greater North Shore, Inc.), and its delivery of long-term services and supports to people age 3 and older throughout the North Shore...
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization maintains a residential facility with 20 units which provide housing to low income elderly persons in saugus, ma. Funding to build the facility was provided by the dept of housing and urban development.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 78
- Accountability: 78
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -42.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.9; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $358K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $254K · 7 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.