Local 2222 Ibew Benevolent Fund Tr

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043490716
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Quincy, MA, USA
Phone
6179296000
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,242
Expenses
$48,308
Assets
$27,588
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN J HOLLAND (PRESIDENT)
  • JULIO D DE LA CRUZ (TRUSTEE/VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MYLES J CALVEY (BUSINESS MANAGER FINANCIAL SEC): $260,182 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN J HOLLAND (PRESIDENT): $193,529 total reported compensation
  • PAUL G ENGLISH (BUSINESS AGENT): $192,829 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Raises money to help support worthwhile community and other projects that need funding such as school sports teams, police and fire department causes, scholarships and disease research.

What it reported doing in 2025

Local 2222 Benevolent Fund raised money for " Bread of Life" during our Holiday Drive. All money raised was disbursed to Bread of Life. This worthwhile organization is a nonprofit, nondenominational, faith-based food security organization based in Malden, MA that provides over 1.5 million pounds of free food a year for economically struggling and disadvantaged families, individuals, youth and senior citizens in the North metro Boston area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 46
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 5th 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: 26%; rating input score 26; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 191.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $260K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 43 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.