Rodman For Kids Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043329283
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Foxborough, MA, USA
Phone
5085437892
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,346,968
Expenses
$2,533,823
Assets
$2,112,038
Liabilities
$907,934

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMY ROSSMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR / CLERK)
  • JOE D'ARRIGO (PRESIDENT / CHAIRMAN)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMY ROSSMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR / CLERK): $201,389 total reported compensation
  • Jessica Feenan (Director of Development): $140,684 total reported compensation
  • Marisa Collins (Chief of Staff): $116,251 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To benefit disadvantaged youths from all ethnic and cultural backgrounds.

What it reported doing in 2025

The ride for kids (bicycle road race) is an umbrella charity raising funds for youth-focused social service agencies that support at-risk children in Massachusetts. The ride for kids and its agencies fundraise year-round, culminating in the annual bicycle road race event each fall. The event is a collaborative effort of all affiliated charities.

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 83% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 75.9%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 42.7%; rating input score 43; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -17.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.3% of revenue deployed · 75.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $201K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.