Ma Cape Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 920465836
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Worcester, MA, USA
- Phone
- 7184964276
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,206
- Expenses
- $45,106
- Assets
- $17,729
- Liabilities
- $5,000
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARY GOSLIN (PRESIDENT/ CHAIR)
People named in this filing
- DAVID PERDA PHD (DIRECTOR)
- MARK HACKATHORN (DIRECTOR)
- MARIA WAGNER (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We aim to preserve the independence and foster the collaborative work of ma private schools and to support the fundamental right of parents to direct their children's education.
What it reported doing in 2024
We give voice to the unique perspectives of ma private schools and the families that they serve. We provide a forum for the private school community to engage with policy makers and each other. We work to increase collaboration and share best practices across ma private schools.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.1%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.2%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -26.4% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 74.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76.1% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.