Massachusetts Attorneys Title Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262882545
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Beverly, MA, USA
Phone
9789272211
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$97,980
Expenses
$98,599
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS BUSSONE II (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVIN ATWOOD (SECRETARY): $52,000 total reported compensation
  • THOMAS BUSSONE II (PRESIDENT): $27,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide title insurance agent services to attorneys.

What it reported doing in 2016

To support the real estate bar association.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 8
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 24
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 9.2%; rating input score 9
  • Program expense ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 9
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 11
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 80.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -14.9% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.5% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 9.2% of revenue deployed · 9.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 9/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.