Paralyzed Veterans of America New England Chapter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046112881
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
West Roxbury, MA, USA
Phone
8006601181
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$333,750
Expenses
$397,385
Assets
$1,477,460
Liabilities
$69,644

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRADFORD CARLSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK MURPHY (EXECUTIVE DI): $80,000 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 new england chapter, paralyzed veterans of america is a 501(c)(3) non- profit organization and the only congressionally chartered veterans service organization dedicated solely for the benefit and representation of veterans with spinal cord injury or disease. For more than 75 years, pva has ensured veterans receive the benefits earned through their service to our nation; monitored their care in va spinal cord injury units; and funded research and education in the search for a cure, improved care and quality of life for individuals with paralysis.

What it reported doing in 2024

Chapter advocacy and legislative work fy25 marked a high point in advocacy and legislative engagement for our new england chapter. In june, our chapter conducted its strongest capitol hill visit in recent memory, meeting with congressional offices to advance policies critical to veterans with spinal cord injuries, including healthcare access, caregiver support, and benefits protection. The visit included participation from our board members, volunteers, and staff, demonstrating the collective strength and credibility of our chapter. Our advocacy efforts extended here at home with policymakers throughout various new england local congressional offices, ensuring that the unique needs of paralyzed veterans are considered in legislation and resource allocation. Our chapter also maintained a close working relationship with va facilities, providing input on accessibility improvements and contributing to programs that enhance the quality of care for our members. Through these efforts, our new england chapter continues to amplify the voices of paralyzed veterans, ensuring that their concerns are represented and that policies are informed by lived experience. Because of the solid relationships we have formed throughout new england, our chapter was honored to receive several special invitations to the presidential inauguration in january in Washington, dc.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -19.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.72; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.1%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.9% of revenue deployed · 72.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $287K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.