Masoc Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043477556
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pittsfield, MA, USA
Phone
4133440367
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$282,232
Expenses
$255,821
Assets
$217,060
Liabilities
$12,897

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MEAGAN BOSSONG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MEAGAN BOSSONG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $107,113 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN CREEDEN (DIRECTOR): $4,600 total reported compensation
  • LYNN SANFORD (DIRECTOR): $1,150 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 prevention of sexual abuse by educating professionals and public officials regarding best practices and the need for early and specialized intervention, assessment, treatment and management in the lives of sexually abusive children and youth.

What it reported doing in 2024

Masoc held a series of professional development and professional credentialing trainings, both virtual and in-person, including 2 virtual and one in-person conference, as well as 9 monthly lunch and learn webinars. Masoc also conducted case consultations, organizational capacity-building training, and convened statewide partnership networks to advance the organizational mission of effectively preventing and responding to sexual harm by youth.

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 99% 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

STRONG - 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.2%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,560.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.2% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $240K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.