New England Aftercare Ministries Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 222581896
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Framingham, MA, USA
- Phone
- 5088746194
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,761,167
- Expenses
- $1,788,513
- Assets
- $624,238
- Liabilities
- $384,595
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kathy Laflash (President)
- David A Lang (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- David A Lang (Executive Director): $93,067 total reported compensation
- Serenity R Love (Director of Operations): $71,071 total reported compensation
- Theresa McClain (Operations Coodrinator): $50,328 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of new england aftercare ministries is to create and foster a christian organization to: provide a means for the church of jesus christ to offer reconciliation to god and to society for persons with substance abuse problems; provide a structured loving environment, by which those who are sincerely motivated might successfully reenter society; aid in building intimate and supportive relationships between churches and residents in the program; minister to the needs of families related to the program; be a good witness to the love and power of god in the community: establish a center or centers in which this work can be accomplished.
What it reported doing in 2024
Neam was incorporated in 1984 to counsel ex-offenders in the new england area. The bridge house residential substance abuse recovery program was opened in 1987 and now serves approximately thirty three men at a time. The programs are six to nine months long. Men come to the programes with substance abuse problems. They may or may not have criminal justice backgrounds. Neam also provides counseling, case management and recovery lifestyle training.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.9%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.9% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.