Wachusett Health Education Action Team

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
042759988
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Clinton, MA, USA
Phone
9783656349
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Transportation Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$337,781
Expenses
$377,178
Assets
$170,886
Liabilities
$154,146

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support individuals and families who are experiencing economic and personal challenges by providing emergency services and programs that promote self-sufficiency.

What it reported doing in 2010

Emergency food, shelter and utility assistance, school expense assistance programs, and holiday expense assistance programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.9; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $287K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $53K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.