Melwood Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991926048
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Upper Marlboro, MD, USA
Phone
3015998000
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,900,123
Expenses
$13,029,229
Assets
$27,268,323
Liabilities
$3,724,937

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

Leadership & pay

20 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 OPERATING 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 inc. Is a supporting organization established to operate exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of publicly supported charities.

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
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 71% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.2%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 40.7%; rating input score 41
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 27.2%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.2% of revenue deployed · 40.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $570K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.