New Bedford Police Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046113125
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
New Bedford, MA, USA
Phone
5089916357
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$139,256
Expenses
$59,986
Assets
$2,613,745
Liabilities
$16,547

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VICTOR MENDES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SCOTT ALVES (DIRECTOR)
  • DANIEL AMARAL (DIRECTOR)
  • MARK BLOUIN (SECRETARY)

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

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide benefits to police personnel

What it reported doing in 2020

To provide retirement and death benefits to police personnel

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 - 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: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.6%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 40.8%; rating input score 41
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 56.9%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 43.57; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.6% of revenue deployed · 40.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 118 of 118 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.