Massachusetts Association of Conservatio

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043041642
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Westford, MA, USA
Phone
9786929395
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,129,337
Expenses
$1,004,978
Assets
$335,742
Liabilities
$44,706

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL LEFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CAROLYN SHORES NESS (PRESIDENT)
  • DON BADEAU (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL LEFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $75,900 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization represents 14 conservation districts. It is committed to build on partnerships with the state and federal government to protect and conserve the commonwealth's natural resources.

What it reported doing in 2023

Accelerated conservation planning project - to improve the delivery of federal and state conservation programs and services to Massachusetts farmers and other landowners. Local work groups - establish local working groups within conservation districts of the commonwealth of Massachusetts to more effectively deliver federal, state, and local resources to meet highest priority conservation needs within the state. Monitoring program - provide monitoring services for frpp contracts, and other ancillary services, to administer cooperative agreements between and among various conservation related parties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.3% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $974K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $119K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.