Lighthouse School Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042939326
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
North Chelmsford, MA, USA
Phone
9782514050
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,744,579
Expenses
$25,734,802
Assets
$42,435,788
Liabilities
$13,115,137

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR SCOTT BARTIS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR SCOTT BARTIS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $364,868 total reported compensation
  • SUZANNE GRECCO (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $355,229 total reported compensation
  • DR MICHAEL PAPPAFAGOS (PROGRAM ADVISOR): $336,119 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lighthouse school is committed to upholding, protecting and advancing the best, long-term interest(s) of children in all of its policy development and service delivery systems. Lighthouse school does this by maintaining a very positive, supportive and growth-oriented culture for all staff and thereby maximizing their motivation to directly and indirectly provide the highest quality of comprehensive bioeducational services possible to as many children who could practically benefit from these services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Comprehensive services program, serving psycho-educational needs of students with multi-disability conditions, both academically and therapeutically. Lighthouse school, inc. Has been in operation since 1967 as a private, not-for-profit (501(c)(3)), chapter 766 approved human service corporation serving the needs of students having a broad range of disabling conditions. Lighthouse school operates according to a comprehensive biodevelopmental services model, meaning services designed to promote total life development are provided during the day, evenings, and weekends, both on-site and in the home communities of attending students. Enrolled students reside in many of the cities and towns of eastern Massachusetts and southern New Hampshire, and are transported to and from lighthouse school daily by the authority of the special education departments of their respective communities. All academic, therapeutic and life preparatory experiences at lighthouse school are planned and provided according to the individualized needs of each enrolled student. These needs are met by services that are within the framework of apex bioeducation. Lighthouse school delivers a specific array of services according to each student's unique profile. The comprehensive biodevelopmental services model offers an interdisciplinary menu from which an individualized treatment plan is developed. Faculty communicate extensively so that quality and consistency characterize all student interactions. Faculty are trained to work together as a synergistic treatment team in order to maximize the quality and effectiveness of services. Lighthouse school is committed to providing services to students with diverse needs and disabilities. Students who attend lighthouse school range in age from 3-22 years of age and have a variety of types of special needs, including developmental/neurological conditions, medical/genetic conditions, learning disabilities and psychiatric diagnoses.academic education is certainly important. However, for the student population at lighthouse school it is not enough. At lighthouse school there is a broad range of curriculum-based, interdisciplinary services which include educational, vocational, communication, clinical, neuromotor and medical services. These services do not simply work along side of each other. Rather, they are integrated into an approach called apex bioeducation, which produces a more powerful technical intervention resulting in positive biodevelopment than any service alone could produce. Lighthouse school has served over 100 communities in eastern Massachusetts, Maine, and southern New Hampshire.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 92.5%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Pass
    • 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: 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: 13.5%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.8% of revenue deployed · 92.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $23.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $365K · 13 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.