Tri-city Community Action Program Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042658101
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Malden, MA, USA
Phone
7813224125
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,342,019
Expenses
$10,521,791
Assets
$4,139,020
Liabilities
$2,866,676

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PHILIP BRONDER-GIROUX (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PHILIP BRONDER-GIROUX (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $74,791 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Tri-city community action program, inc

What it reported doing in 2013

Heartwap the program provides heating emergency assistance for the program provides heating emergency assistance for the program provides heating emergency assistance for the program provides heating emergency assistance for the program provides heating emergency assistance for the program provides heating emergency assistance for

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.6%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.74 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; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 74.6%; rating input score 75; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 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: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.6% of revenue deployed · 95% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $10M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.