Massachusetts Aging Access Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042799672
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lawrence, MA, USA
Phone
9789461318
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Reported finances

Revenue
$723,890
Expenses
$785,898
Assets
$697,943
Liabilities
$177,592

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROSEANN MARTOCCIA - ACCESS CARE (PRESIDENT)
  • LISA GURGONE - MYSTIC VALLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BETSEY CRIMMINS - MYSTIC VALLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BETSEY CRIMMINS - MYSTIC VALLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $203,822 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Encourage and promote the quality of life for elderly residents of Massachusetts through public education; to foster the development of more comprehensive and coordinated service systems to help older people; to act as a liaison with the Massachusetts executive office of aging & independence; to serve as a clearinghouse on developments in the field of aging; and to increase access to eldercare services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Serves as a trade association reprsenting the commonwealth's network of aging services access points and area agencies on aging, including providing advocacy and trainings for these agencies. Provides public education for elderly individuals and works to increase access to eldercare services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.8%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 96.4%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.8% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 28 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $723K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $204K · 28 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.