The Second Step Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222868513
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Newtonville, MA, USA
Phone
6179653999
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,129,268
Expenses
$2,271,810
Assets
$6,724,377
Liabilities
$1,799,514

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEATHER MACK (PRESIDENT)
  • LESLEY COLOGNESI (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SUSAN ROSS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSAN ROSS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,162 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Helping survivors of domestic violence heal and thrive in safe and supportive communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Transitional living program: from july 2024 through february 2025, tss operated a 9-bedroom residence for families leaving emergency, short-term shelter. Families had access to comprehensive case management that allowed them to build skills to support their goal towards independent living. Families also had access to legal advocacy, personal stabilization services, financial literacy, and housing search and advocacy. In february 2025, the second step entered into a strategic partnership with a renowned homeless services provider in order to transfer operations of the transitional living residence. While the second step retains ownership of the property, this provider would continue to operate the program to serve domestic violence survivors and their families, while the second step provided domestic violence supportive services to the residents.

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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.6%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 57.5%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: -6.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.96; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.6% of revenue deployed · 57.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 13 people listed · 2 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: 12 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.