Mass Insight Education and Research Institute Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 043369687
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Boston, MA, USA
- Phone
- 8573155243
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health - General and Rehabilitative N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,560,823
- Expenses
- $7,182,836
- Assets
- $1,986,796
- Liabilities
- $646,295
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SUSAN LUSI (FORMER PRESIDENT AND CEO)
- ANDREA WOLFE (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ANDREA WOLFE (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $286,635 total reported compensation
- MICHELLE MERCADO (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $286,322 total reported compensation
- LESLIE CAROL CHANG (CHIEF OF STAFF): $261,489 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To partner with states, districts, schools, and communities to implement customized strategies and build capacity to advance equity and opportunity in k-12 education, so that all students, and particularly those who have been systemically marginalized, are prepared to achieve their academic and personal potential.
What it reported doing in 2024
In fy25, mass insight's two largest program services ap stem & english and school improvement - merged into one program service and team. Here is a summary of our program service accomplishments.mass insight partners with state education agencies, districts, schools, and communities to implement customized strategies and build capacity to advance access and opportunity in k12 education, so that all students are prepared to achieve their academic and personal potential. With a deepening focus on secondary education, our program offers services in the following areas: school transformation, middle school foundations, advanced academics, and postsecondary pathways.during school year 2024-25, mass insight's program team led 15 projects across 4 states, 77 districts, and 246 schools impacting approximately 100,000 students. Thirty-nine percent of schools served were designated as in need of "comprehensive support and improvement (csi) or "targeted support and improvement (tsi)".amongst our impact highlights are increases in:- proficiency in math and ela- ap student sense of belonging and reduced stress- increase of students in least restrictive settings- quarterly benchmark attainment and csi status exit- teacher effectiveness, knowledge & skills, and improved feedback practices- ap participation and success* in ma (*obtaining qualifying score of 3 or above on ap exam)in one of our largest projects, mass insight partnered with 97 schools across the state of Massachusetts supporting work in increasing ap participation and success in ela and stem advanced placement courses. Our partner schools outpaced national trends in the proportion of students who obtained a qualifying score on ap exams.in more detail, mi sy24-25 ap stem & english partner school results include, - a 6% increase in the total number of students who took ap exams in ela & stem subjects (as compared to sy23-24)- a 29% increase in the total number of students who obtained a qualifying score in ap exam(s) in ela & stem subjects (as compared to sy23-24). Nationally, the percentage increase was 11%.- when compared to the national trend, mass insight's partner schools more than doubled the percentage increase on the number of students obtaining a qualifying score in ela & stem subjects in sy24-25.- in one partner school in one of the largest districts in Massachusetts, our close work with the leadership team and ap teachers contributed to profound increases in ap success with a 364% increase in qualifying scores within one year.overall, programmatically our team and approach engender trust, and our partners are satisfied. - on average, mi's partners responded "9" to how likely they were to recommend mi for similar work to other organizations on a scale from 0-10- as one school leader partner said, "[our engagement manager] was an incredible thought partner who challenged our leadership team to push hard through challenges in making progress toward our school goals."
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 65% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.2%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 66.6%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 28.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.2% of revenue deployed · 66.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $287K · 21 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $229K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.