Preachers' Aid Society of New England

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046037997
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
Location
Wells, ME, USA
Phone
2074673246
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,739,303
Expenses
$2,705,660
Assets
$53,183,149
Liabilities
$70,335

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elizabeth Dallas (President)
  • Lynn Matson (1st Vice President)
  • Tracy Tarver (2nd Vice President)
  • Dr Wesley E Palmer (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dr Wesley E Palmer (Executive Director): $178,960 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Preachers' Aid Society of New England endeavors to remain faithful to our core commitment to improve the quality of life among our United Methodist clergy, especially those who have retired from ministry and their surviving spouses. Through our strong financial support for retiree health care, training in personal financial management, spiritual life retreats and direct services to clergy families in need, we utilize the endowment of our Society to help generations of families enjoy a rich and full life in Christian ministry.

What it reported doing in 2024

Preachers' Aid Society of New England maintains a vigorous program of service to clergy families, demonstrating a major commitment to retirees and their welfare. Programs and services for retirees include in-home visitation, educational program support, emergency assistance, tending the fire, retiree housing, higher education loan program, retiree green loan program, baby grants, retiree health care, occasional clergy gatherings, retiree methodent program, and the Taylor Fellowship award. In addition to its direct program services, during this tax year the Society also paid over $390,000 in grants to other organizations as well as over $240,000 across 80 awards directly to individuals, each gift furthering the Society's charitable mission.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, and 30% for grants.

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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.3%; rating input score 98; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 1.2%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.66; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 17 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $139K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.