Merrimack Valley Economic Development Council Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 043479606
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2009–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- Newburyport, MA, USA
- Phone
- 9789758787
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public, Societal Benefit
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,279
- Expenses
- $42,996
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
People named in this filing
- KENDALL M WALLACE (COUNCIL CO-CHAIR)
- VINCENT C MANZI JR ESQ (COUNCIL CO-CHAIR)
- PEDRO L ARCE (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
Collaborative economic development
What it reported doing in 2015
Advance the economic interests of the merrimack valley area of Massachusetts by fostering greater communication and cooperation between the public and private sectors, and by encouraging collaborative efforts between and among individual communities, leading to sustainable economic growth and prosperity for every community in the merrimack valley.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 7
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 58%; rating input score 58
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3,261.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -20.5% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -26.5% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -26.9% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 58% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $25K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2009 to 2015
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.