Massachusetts Workforce Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200089926
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Boston, MA, USA
Phone
6177801770
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Employment N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,051
Expenses
$23,857
Assets
$13,514
Liabilities
$11

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BETH HOGAN (PRESIDENT)
  • CLARE SHEPHERD (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BETH HOGAN (PRESIDENT)
  • CLARE SHEPHERD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TERRY MORAN (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Massachusetts workforce alliance, inc. Is to create true economic opportunity for low-income people by uniting individuals, organizations and coalitions that advance sensible workforce development policy. We convene groups across sectors to collaborate on solutions.

What it reported doing in 2015

Since 2009, Massachusetts workforce alliance, inc. (mwa) has been focused on the jobs and job-training needed in an emerging sustainable economy, with special attention on jobs that have a low threshold to entry, and a potential career path toward family-sustaining wages. Much of mwa's attention has been on work in a Massachusetts sustainable food system, and how to ensure these jobs are full-time and fully-year. Additionally, mwa works on the emerging and potential jobs in drinking water, waste water, and storm water industries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -20.4% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -23.8% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -23.7% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.