Marblehead Community Access & Media

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270335407
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Marblehead, MA, USA
Phone
7816378213
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Television

Reported finances

Revenue
$581,715
Expenses
$493,305
Assets
$2,107,362
Liabilities
$193,515

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOAN W GOLOBOY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • ROBERT F PECK JR (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOAN W GOLOBOY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $89,818 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN Q CASWELL (PROGRAM COORDINATO): $68,486 total reported compensation
  • JAMES H MARONEY (PRODUCTION MGR.): $59,402 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the Corporation shall be exclusively charitable, educational and scientific within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS Code, including as the primary purpose the operation of a public, educational and governmental access and community television studio, which will provide customary community access services including but not limited to those contemplated under the access sections of the Federal Cable Act, 47 United States Code 531, or other applicable law.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provide town residents with access to and training in the use of community television facilities & channels and provide general public, town & schools with the opportunities to enhance community and school information in connection with the cable television system and related media technologies available in the town of marblehead

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.8%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 65.4%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.2%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.27; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 52.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.8% of revenue deployed · 65.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $323K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.