Margaret Fuller Neighborhood House
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 042103782
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Cambridge, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6175474680
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Neighborhood Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,163,010
- Expenses
- $1,601,868
- Assets
- $2,106,233
- Liabilities
- $473,116
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHERYL WATSON (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- SELVIN CHAMBERS (EXECUTIVE DI): $119,230 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 mission of the margaret fuller house is to provide integrated services to individuals and families to empower them to overcome challenges, reach their potential and achieve their goals.
What it reported doing in 2024
The food pantry is one of the largest volume food pantries of the twelve food pantries located in cambridge. 65% of the patrons are from cambridge. The pantry has open hours four different days per week. It is one of only two food pantries in cambridge where low-income residents from surrounding cities are eligible. It is central to meeting food security goals of the community. Approx. 300,000 pounds of food is distributed annually. There are 75 volunteers involved monthly and nearly 1000 patrons (households) registered. The community advancement program provides comprehensive wrap-around services for individuals 18 years and older to help them develop skills, obtain gainful employment, financial assistance and individualized resources to meet specific identified needs. We pride ourselves on our ability to address all the vocalized needs within the family structure including financial and employment.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 89
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th 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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -37.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.4%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.