Maryland Association of Non-profit Organizations

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521749231
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4434382348
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonprofit Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,080,796
Expenses
$6,339,986
Assets
$2,304,143
Liabilities
$1,085,720

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GABRIELA LEMUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MARYLAND LATINOS UNIDOS)
  • AMY MADSEN (VICE PRESIDENT OF PROGRAMS)
  • HEATHER ILIFF (FORMER PRESIDENT, CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • HEATHER ILIFF (FORMER PRESIDENT, CEO): $186,063 total reported compensation
  • GABRIELA LEMUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MARYLAND LATINOS UNIDOS): $159,528 total reported compensation
  • CARMEN MARSHALL (DIRECTOR OF CONSULTING AND CHIEF EQUITY OFFICER): $153,183 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Maryland nonprofits' mission is to strengthen organizations and networks for greater quality of life and equity.

What it reported doing in 2024

Consulting: in 2024, the Maryland nonprofits consulting group served 184 clients. The consulting group provides strategic planning, capacity building, board development, fundraising, and organizational development services. Legal services include nonprofit start-up and application for tax-exemption, tax and legal compliance, governance matters, bylaws and contract review, employment matters, negotiations, strategic partnerships, mergers and acquisitions, including corporation integrations, and corporate dissolution.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd 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: 80.6%; rating input score 81; 22nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -4.3%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $292K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.