Masonic Charity Foundation of Ct
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 061435920
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Wallington, CT, USA
- Phone
- 2036795555
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $12,080,186
- Expenses
- $2,725,412
- Assets
- $232,161,912
- Liabilities
- $2,573,349
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CARRIE FULLER-MCMAHON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- JON-PAUL VENOIT PRESIDENT (AND CEO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY)
Highest reported compensation
- JON-PAUL VENOIT PRESIDENT (AND CEO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY): $855,894 total reported compensation
- DAVID LAWLOR CFO ASSISTANT (TREASURER (EFFECTIVE 01/01/25)): $829,570 total reported compensation
- STEVEN D BEAULIEU CFO (ASSISTANT TREASURER (THRU 12/31/24)): $261,119 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Masonic charity foundation of ct will promote, solicit, secure and steward charitable gifts from the masonic family and the community to benefit the residents and patients of masonicare and its affiliates, as well as to build further its endowment fund, with emphasis on meeting donors' gift giving objectives. The masonic charity foundation of ct will be recognized as a financially successful and fiscally responsible philanthropic organization benefiting the residents and patients served by masonicare and its affiliates by offering a full complement of gift giving opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Masonic charity foundation of ct, inc. Provides planned giving and development support to its affiliates; manages all investments; provides financial and charitable support as needed to the tax exempt affiliates within the masonicare system.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 42
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 87
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 36%; rating input score 36
- Program expense ratio: 66.8%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 77.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 85.18; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 36% of revenue deployed · 66.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $856K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $1.7M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 24 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.