Polus Center for Social and Economic Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042697866
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Athol, MA, USA
Phone
9783681550
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,578,587
Expenses
$1,623,322
Assets
$369,900
Liabilities
$140,588

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL LUNDQUIST (CEO Int'l Programs)
  • THERESA KANE (CEO Us Programs)
  • STEPHEN KIERAS (PRESIDENT)
  • NELLIE ZARIF (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL LUNDQUIST (CEO Int'l Programs): $106,634 total reported compensation
  • THERESA KANE (CEO Us Programs): $104,773 total reported compensation
  • JOSHUA PEARSON (Director): $76,805 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 polus center for social and economic development, inc. Strives to create opportunities for persons with disabilities, especially people who are blind or visually impaired, and members of other vulnerable groups to become valued citizens within their communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Training and consulting - working with grassroots organizations to help them plan and implement economic, social intergration, and community based rehabilitation projects. Active participation in these planning sessions offers a unique action learning opportunity for participants to learn about victim assistance and developing a person-centered human service model. In addition, the organization provides leadership training, organization development, and small business capacity building to both non-profit and for-profit organizations throughout the u.s. The organization also advocates for job development for people with disabilities so that they might find jobs based on their skills and interests.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 50
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 80.5%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $39.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -2.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.23; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 80.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 15 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.