Ludlow Boys and Girls Club Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042089767
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ludlow, MA, USA
Phone
4135832072
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,339,566
Expenses
$2,178,463
Assets
$2,468,439
Liabilities
$120,901

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSUE IRIZARRY (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSUE IRIZARRY (PRESIDENT & CEO): $126,104 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To inspire and enable youth and adults to build better communities by providing life-enhancing experiences and programs through which they will realize their full potential as responsible and caring citizens.

What it reported doing in 2025

The ludlow community center/randall boys & girls club has served as the town of ludlow's main resource for life-enhancing youth programs and activities. The club operates 51 weeks a year, 6 days a week, serving members from ludlow as well as surrounding communities in hampden and hampshire counties. The club provides a broad range of programs in five core program areas: character and leadership development; education and career development; health and life skills; the arts; and sports, fitness and recreation; and several specialized initiatives, based on community need. Programs are designed to drive positive outcomes for youth and reinforce critical life skills. All programs are for the benefit of local youth and adults. Programs include: youth recreation, athletics, summer camp, swimming, basketball, preschool, before and after school programs, remote learning programs, youth dances and computer training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 61% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.9%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 67.2%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 6.9%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.9% of revenue deployed · 67.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 26 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $156K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.