Management Assistance Program for Nonprofits Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411479097
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6516471216
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonprofit Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,400,251
Expenses
$4,308,604
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUDITH ALNES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JUDITH ALNES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $162,925 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA CLARE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $134,417 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Fueling the impact and effectiveness of nonprofits with guidance, expertise and capital.

What it reported doing in 2016

Accounting and Strategic Services: Accounting Services - MAP accountants help nonprofit organizations establish and manage accounting and financial management systems and practices that result in appropriate oversight and use of financial resources. MAP accountants help nonprofits account for restricted funds appropriately and prepare needed financial reports for their board of directors, funders and regulators. MAP helps nonprofits identify and adopt recommended financial policies and procedures, create and monitor budgets, prepare regulatory reports and more. Strategic Services - MAP works with nonprofit leaders, nonprofit boards, and representatives from communities served to strengthen nonprofit organizations through recruiting board members for organizations, developing strategic plans, assisting organizations with strategic alliances/restructuring, assisting organizations with financial sustainability processes, helping nonprofits with organizational development, assisting organizations with succession planning, providing a pilot project in the development of the new service line of succession planning, hosting monthly Leaders Circles for nonprofit participants, providing professional coaching and leadership training to nonprofit leaders, conducting board development work with nonprofit organizations, and providing board training (Board Boot Camps, Advanced Board Boot Camps, and Board Chair training) to individuals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.2%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th 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: 99.5%; rating input score 99; 36th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -62.9% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.2% of revenue deployed · 90.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $163K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 19 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 15 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.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.