The Arc Maryland Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520741602
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, MD, USA
Phone
4105719320
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,082,469
Expenses
$987,363
Assets
$3,563,069
Liabilities
$327,295

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GUY STEPHENS (PRESIDENT)
  • TONY ZANFORDINO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LORI SCOTT (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREA KOLP (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA KOLP (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,869 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 arc Maryland works to create a world where children and adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (idd) have and enjoy equal rights and opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Advocacy: systems advocacy for the rights and quality of life of persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities.helped families secure post-secondary services for students exiting special education (transitioning youth). Helped families receive services through the autism waiver. Systems advocacy and improvement at the state level to ensure and strengthen human and civil rights for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities: includes lifespan oriented rights in public education and special education and continuing education, child care, housing, transportation, employment and family supports.legislative advocacy impacted 10,000 individuals and families, including education rights, special education, child care, transition planning from school to adult life, and privacy protections. Leadership on behalf of 7,000 children and adults and their families on state waiting lists. Lead statewide grassroots campaign effort to educate the public and decision makers about these needs. Other programs includeself advocacy network offices offers peer mentoring, training and promotes leadership by people with developmental disabilities. Together we're better promotes inclusive education. Community-awareness training on intellectual and developmental disabilities

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 98% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 8.8%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.61; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.6% of revenue deployed · 91% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $899K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $175K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.