Lupinewood Institute Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 832311667
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Greenfield, MA, USA
- Phone
- 4135226596
- Rating
- 55
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $213,766
- Expenses
- $85,891
- Assets
- $136,625
- Liabilities
- $4,013
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Hunter Swanson (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Hunter Swanson (Executive Director): $10,800 total reported compensation
- Taryn Amina (director): $3,600 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To organize and administer community-based arts and educational programs.
What it reported doing in 2024
Paper Ghost is a print-making studio open to the general public on a membership basis. The studio is still in its preparation phase. 2024 was spent training staff and developing the space with necessary materials for a fully-functional studio. It is anticipated that Paper Ghost will open to the general public in summer 2025. In addition to studio and creation space, it has plans to host gallery shows of work produced through its programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 44
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 72
- Sustainability: 67
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 31.5%; rating input score 32
- Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 1.2%; rating input score 1; 37th 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: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 59.8%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.59; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.8%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 31.5% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $67K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.