Martha's Vineyard Law Enforcement Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043633994
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Edgartown, MA, USA
Phone
5085239731
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$452,061
Expenses
$371,674
Assets
$337,271
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RANDHI BELAIN (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER HABEKOST (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RANDHI BELAIN (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER HABEKOST (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SEAN SLAVIN (CLERK)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To provide public safety mutual aid to member police departments. Said mutual aid may arise from but not be limited to enemy action, natural disasters, fires, floods, storms, earthquakes, landslides, aircraft accidents, search and rescue operations, riots, mob action, civil unrest, and other unusual occurrences that require police intervention beyond the capabilities of a single member agency.

What it reported doing in 2024

Supported the emergency communications network for the island of martha's vineyard hosted by the dukes county sheriff's office. Received payments from each of the six towns on the island and used that to hire and pay the vendor that provides computer network services to operate the record keeping and related emergency communications services to protect and defend the population of the entire island.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.8%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $372K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.