Melwood

Legal name: Melwood Horticultural Training Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520857690
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Upper Marlboro, MD, USA
Phone
(240) 492-1984
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Developmentally Disabled Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$127,986,933
Expenses
$128,031,037
Assets
$59,411,471
Liabilities
$18,037,938

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LARYSA M KAUTZ (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • LARYSA M KAUTZ (PRESIDENT & CEO): $570,495 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT T GIBSON (CHIEF OPERATION OFFICER): $401,292 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH DIAZ (CHIEF GROWTH OFFICER): $390,512 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Melwood drives innovative solutions through employment, community-based services and advocacy. Our vision is a world that fully includes people with disabilities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Employment services: contract services fulfills melwood's mission by employing hundreds of people with disabilities in over 70 different federal and local government sites throughout the dc region. In these inclusive work settings, people earn living wages, have health insurance and pay taxes to be fully contributing members of their communities. Contract services generate a margin that enables melwood to support the workers with disabilities and invest in further opportunities for employment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $114.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $570K · 23 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $10.8M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.