Mcclphei Inc C/o Roxbury Community College Library
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 270867667
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Boston, MA, USA
- Phone
- 8577011386
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $18,200
- Expenses
- $26,003
- Assets
- $36,160
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JORDANA SHAW (PRESIDENT)
- STEPHANIE WALKER (VICE-PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- RICHARD FELVER (DIRECTOR)
- NATALIE BEACH (DIRECTOR)
- TIMOTHY GEROLAMI (DIRECTOR)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mcclphei is an organization comprised of the library directors of the twenty-nine campuses of the commonwealth's public higher education system. Mcclphei originated in 1968 as an informal advisory group to the board of higher education for the purpose of coordinating the expenditure of eleven million dollars on a six-year books for college libraries project. Since 1974, mcclphei has become an advocacy group for library funding, and has implemented resource sharing in the electronic age.mcclphei's mission is to provide collective advocacy and education for strong fiscal resources to serve the information needs of our users, and to advance the intellectual, cultural, and economic opportunities for our students, faculty, and all other citizens of the commonwealth
What it reported doing in 2025
Mcclphei's mission is to provide collective advocacy and education for strong fiscal resources to serve the information needs of our users, and to advance the intellectual, cultural, and economic opportunities for our students, faculty, and all other citizens of the commonwealth.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -42.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.