The Webb Innovation Center for Dyslexia

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223127959
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Lincoln, MA, USA
Phone
7812591500
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,002
Expenses
$1,614
Assets
$48,868

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CLIFFORD CORT (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CLIFFORD CORT (PRESIDENT)
  • HEIDI-RACHEL WEBB (TREASURER)
  • TONI O'CONNOR (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Webb innovation center for dyslexia, inc. Seeks to create a paradigm shift in the thinking and behavior of parents, teachers and significant others interacting with children with school difficulty, primarily dyslexics. Additionally, our mission includes continuing dr. Webb's legacy of celebrating each person's unique gifts, and teaching them to embrace and honor their individual talents.

What it reported doing in 2024

Support programs related to dyslexia.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.3%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 67.7%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 30.28; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -36.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.