New Garden Park Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201727883
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Worcester, MA, USA
Phone
5087555734
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,885,711
Expenses
$10,401,696
Assets
$53,568,515
Liabilities
$19,380,830

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG L BLAIS (PRESIDENT &)

People named in this filing

  • CRAIG L BLAIS (PRESIDENT &)
  • ROBERT HENNIGAN (CHAIR)
  • KATHERINE BADGIS (VICE CHAIR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To carry out and operate for the benefit of the charitable purpose of the worcester business development corporation (wbdc) and lessen the burdens of government by combating community deterioration and enabling economic development by providing infrastructure in distressed areas through the acquistion, holding, owning, maintenance, improvement, lease, finance, refinance, selling, exchange or other disposition of all or part of its properties.

What it reported doing in 2025

To lessen the burdens of government by combating community deterioration and enabling economic development by providing infrastructure in distressed areas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some related-organization disclosures are missing and liabilities are high compared with assets.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.4%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 99.9%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 38.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.15; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.4% of revenue deployed · 99.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $356K reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.