Share |

Family Service Association of Greater Boston

 31 Heath Street
 Boston, MA 02130
[P] (617) 523-6400
[F] (617) 5233034
[email protected]
Sam Solomon
 Printable Profile (Summary / Full)
EIN 04-2160528

LAST UPDATED: 01/14/2019
Organization DBA Family Service of Greater Boston
Former Names --
Organization received a competitive grant from the Boston Foundation in the past five years No


Mission StatementMORE »

Family Service promotes self-sufficiency and well-being of at-risk families, children and youth through innovative, culturally competent, and integrated health and social services, thereby contributing to healthy communities. Serving principally low-income residents of Boston's urban communities, struggling with emotional, psychological, physical and economic impact of poverty, abuse, violence and parental neglect, we target prevention/harm reduction; pee/family education; social-emotional competency; parenting skill-building; and behavioral health and trauma—to prevent/alleviate factors which could lead to family or community crisis. Our core expertise is disrupting the cycle of inter-generational family disadvantage and advancing clients’ potential for life-altering change.

Mission Statement

Family Service promotes self-sufficiency and well-being of at-risk families, children and youth through innovative, culturally competent, and integrated health and social services, thereby contributing to healthy communities. Serving principally low-income residents of Boston's urban communities, struggling with emotional, psychological, physical and economic impact of poverty, abuse, violence and parental neglect, we target prevention/harm reduction; pee/family education; social-emotional competency; parenting skill-building; and behavioral health and trauma—to prevent/alleviate factors which could lead to family or community crisis. Our core expertise is disrupting the cycle of inter-generational family disadvantage and advancing clients’ potential for life-altering change.

FinancialsMORE »

Fiscal Year Jan 01, 2016 to Dec 31, 2016
Projected Income $5,722,227.00
Projected Expense $6,820,627.00

ProgramsMORE »

  • Behavioral Health Programs
  • Family Independence/Teen Living Program
  • Helping Fathers Be Fathers (HFBF)
  • Men in the Making (MIM)
  • Strong Start

Revenue vs. Expense ($000s)

Expense Breakdown 2014 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2013 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2012 (%)

For more details regarding the organization's financial information, select the financial tab and review available comments.


Mission Statement

Family Service promotes self-sufficiency and well-being of at-risk families, children and youth through innovative, culturally competent, and integrated health and social services, thereby contributing to healthy communities. Serving principally low-income residents of Boston's urban communities, struggling with emotional, psychological, physical and economic impact of poverty, abuse, violence and parental neglect, we target prevention/harm reduction; pee/family education; social-emotional competency; parenting skill-building; and behavioral health and trauma—to prevent/alleviate factors which could lead to family or community crisis. Our core expertise is disrupting the cycle of inter-generational family disadvantage and advancing clients’ potential for life-altering change.

Background Statement

Few American social service organizations claim as rich a history as Family Service of Greater Boston, which traces its roots to 1835—during Andrew Jackson’s presidency and only 13 years after Boston’s incorporation as a city.  We have served children, youth and families through the wide sweep of the American experience—during the Civil War, two World Wars, Great Depression, civil rights and women’s movements, and the technology revolution.

The early charities that evolved into Family Service introduced ideas and methods of "self-help" that underlie the modern concepts of community service and philanthropy.  Family Service has carried on the traditions of social innovation which characterized its predecessors.  Adapting to changing needs, we continue to meet the requirements of new generations of residents struggling to overcome the most damaging effects of poverty, discrimination, violence and isolation--today serving more than 6,000 people annually.  Now, as throughout our history, we promote self-sufficiency and well-being as essential to building healthy families and communities.

Impact Statement

What distinguishes Family Service and its value-added contributions to Boston is that, even after 179 years, it is a vibrant, agile organization able to adapt to highly complex human service challenges and committed to embracing the city’s ever-changing ecology through a clear mission, innovative programming and effective deployment of its resources. A 2010 outpatient provider practice analysis by the Massachusetts Behavioral Health Partnership compared our clinical practice to similar practices in Massachusetts and found we address a needier, more complex population, and achieve better results for clients than the overwhelming majority of providers. An analysis by Behavioral Health Labs—a leading independent outcomes management firm—-concluded that, in all symptoms categories for children but one, Family Service surpassed clinical results of comparable providers, despite the acuity of client symptoms.

Some examples of impact:

During 2011-12, we have increased the number of urban Boston early education centers hosting Family Service early child developmentStrong Startclinicians and teacher educators to six from two initial programs—and are now working with centers enrolling nearly 600 students and employing about 100 teachers.

We have launched ourMen in the Makingprogram—targeting inner city minority adolescent boys—in a Boston public charter school. We seek to improve student outcomes by enhancing teachers’ capacity to address social-emotional development issues boys bring to class and by providing clinical support for students referred for counseling.

We have acquired theEfforts to Outcomesperformance measurement system—designed to assess the correlation between client services and outcomes they produce. ETO is particularly adaptable, a desirable feature for a multiservice organization, like Family Service, which must track thousands of clients and report progress and outcome data to multiple public/private funders that typically use different reporting formats.

Needs Statement


The key challenge is maintaining financial stability in the continuing challenging funding environment for social services and acquiring adequate resources to deliver services. We continue to feel the impact of the 2007 reduction in United Way funding that reduced our allocation by nearly 2/3 and has undermined programming. Because of our extensive casework and documented outcomes with children, youth and families, we have long been one of United Way’s leading beneficiaries. Also, state reimbursements for contracted human services have been underfunded for 25+ years—meaning agencies actually lose money delivering state-mandated services. Indeed, a report [Financial Health of Providers in the Massachusetts Human Service System, October 2007] by the Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services concluded that, “in many areas, the financial health of human service providers in the Commonwealth is suffering, and Commonwealth policies have some association with financial health outcomes. . . reflecting precarious results on three important aspects of financial health: profitability, solvency, and liquidity.” Shrinking public funds for human services have exacerbated the problem. This combination of factors has played havoc with Family Service and other human service providers.


CEO Statement

Since its founding, Family Service has demonstrated great adaptability in responding to Greater Boston’s changing social, economic and demographic needs. In retrospect, the agency’s 2005 strategic plan was prescient—initiating a series of bold steps to address the varied challenges of the new decade. By re-defining the agency’s mission, goals and objectives; repositioning our child, youth and family-focused programs to attract greater philanthropic support; and eliminating programs and services that were financially unsustainable and not relevant to the new strategic vision, we have been able to withstand the decade-ending economic collapse, while continuing to deliver high quality, life-altering services. Secure in its values and direction, the agency has been able, during this period, to chart a course for the next decade, which is expected to bring greater economic stability. With a 2010 grant from The Boston Foundation, Family Service conducted an intensive internal analysis of administrative and program operations and developed a business plan that sets out a range of goals and objectives designed to expand key programs—where greatest demand exists—and generate additional revenues essential to program expansion.


Our theory of change commits to delivering effective, practical and customized direct service to improve and sustain behavioral health, social functioning, and family management skills for low- to moderate-income families. All programs seek to place and maintain clients on a multi-generational trajectory of responsible civic participation evidenced by consistent academic readiness, positive economic engagement and decreased reliance on public welfare systems. Our programs achieve improved parenting, family/life management skills, enhanced behavioral health status and decreased risk factors that lead to more extensive and expensive interventions. Our business plan charts a planned phase of growth built upon a foundation of program sustainability and innovation to fulfill our 177-year promise of exemplary constituent service and return on social investment, and commits the agency to:


¨        Enhance program delivery and impact through technology-assisted efficiencies and sharpening program alignment with our stated theory of change.

¨        Increase the scale of programs directly related to the improvement of social-emotional development in children and youth.

¨        Improve service outcomes and impact evaluation through better data tracking, reporting and review processes.

¨        Pursue ongoing board development to ensure long-term strategic and program success.

Board Chair Statement


Geographic Area Served

In a specific U.S. city, cities, state(s) and/or region.
City of Boston- Citywide (Indiv. neighborhoods also listed)
Greater Boston, with a particular focus on the urban communities of Roxbury, Dorchester, Mattapan, Jamaica Plain, Allston-Brighton, South End and South Boston,

Organization Categories

  1. Human Services - Human Services
  2. Mental Health & Crisis Intervention - Mental Health Treatment
  3. -

Independent research has been conducted on this organization's theory of change or on the effectiveness of this organization's program(s)



Behavioral Health Programs

Composed of two divisions—Center for Behavioral Health and Family-Based Services—our clinical programs 1) focus on stabilizing at-risk children and youth who have experienced traumatic stress and dysfunction due to family violence, sexual assault, emotional or physical abuse, chronic neglect, traumatic loss, or school and community violence; 2) offer psycho-pharmacology services, as indicated; 3) provide mental health services to children and pre-adolescents enrolled in the Boston Public Schools; 4) provide services such as in-home behavioral therapy and mentoring; parenting skills education, family coping skills development, child behavioral health, and out-of-home placements for children/youth with significant behavioral issues; and 5) counsels parents how to restore children and families to optimal functioning at home, at school, or at work. Clinicians work with clients individually and in families to identify personal strengths, understand available choices, and address challenges.

Budget  $3,830,022.00
Category  Human Services, General/Other Family-Based Services
Population Served Children and Youth (0 - 19 years) Adults Families
Program Short-Term Success  From a typical Effective Black Parenting class (15-20), as many as a quarter of participants seek to take the workshop program a second time to further enhance their parenting skills.
Program Long-Term Success  The pace of change in human behavior varies according to a number of factors: age, adaptability, depth of challenges faced, and availability of supportive resources, among others.  In our Effective Black Parenting program, for example, more than 85% of participants, over time, report that the 15-week workshop series greatly enhanced their parenting skills and helped to reduce parent-child tensions that often impact family life.
Program Success Monitored By  Program assessment takes place primarily through pre-/post-surveys of participants to measure their knowledge before and after program engagement, as well as through selected participant interviews.
Examples of Program Success 


Sharisse:I feel like I learned a lot from this class more so from other people’s experiences, how they deal with their children, other perspectives and from Eva I learned different tools.


Prentice:This class helped me view situations differently. I used to scream, really lose my temper and even use my hand to spank them. Ms Eva showed me that there are other ways to discipline and that they are just children and some things are just what children do. I started implementing timeout in my home it has been successful so far.


Guylande:The program helped me deal with my guilt I feel with my daughter. I now know that I don’t have to give her everything she wants because I missed out on so much of her life. In here I feel comfortable to share. I have shared a lot of major moments in my life that have occurred during this class. I have been using positive praise more now with my daughter and have noticed a difference in our relationship.

Family Independence/Teen Living Program

Family Independence/Teen Living Program (TLP) provides group home living for teen mothers (and their children) receiving public assistance and unable to live with their families or the fathers of their children due to abuse, neglect, substance abuse or other extenuating circumstance.  They have low educational attainment and few job skills.  TLP helps them move toward independence and economic self-sufficiency, graduate high school (or pass the GED), practice good parenting and life management skills, avoid child abuse, and raise healthy, emotionally stable, and school-ready children.
Budget  $1,516,329.00
Category  Human Services Parenting Education
Population Served Female Youth/Adolescents (14 - 19 years) Poor/Economically Disadvantaged, Indigent, General
Program Short-Term Success  --
Program Long-Term Success  --
Program Success Monitored By  --
Examples of Program Success  --

Helping Fathers Be Fathers (HFBF)

Helping Fathers Be Fathers is a parenting education and skills development program for urban minority males. Helping Fathers focuses on achieving and sustaining behaviors that reflect responsible male parenting, healthy child development and overall family wellness--and centers on decreasing barriers that harm children's potential (i.e., learning, poverty, social-emotional development, etc.) and promoting stronger families, healthier communities and, importantly, fathers better positioned to contribute to their communities.
Budget  $269,460
Category  Human Services, General/Other Family Preservation
Population Served Males Minorities Families
Program Short-Term Success  All men entering the HFBF program will be responsive to individual and/or group counseling sessions and participate in discussions about their roles as fathers and spouses/partners.
Program Long-Term Success  75% of men entering the program will take greater responsibility for their child/ren.
Program Success Monitored By  Surveys and interviews.  Efforts to Outcomes performance measurement system.
Examples of Program Success 

Notable is the wide range of fathers referred to the program—a sign of HFBF’s successful reach:


¨       Those in acute debilitating stages of emotional/mental health distress, requiring collaboration with our psychiatric nurse practitioner to ensure stabilization before basic assessments and-depth therapeutic work could begin.

¨       An 18-year old father who is grappling with the onset of a serious mental disorder.

¨       Ten fathers participating in ourEffective Black Parentingprogram, which addresses the special challenges faced by African American parents and their children and is respectful of African American culture and communication patterns.

¨       Ten participating men who have fathered children by girls in FSGB’s residentialFamily IndependenceTeen Living Program.

¨       Thirty men engaged in group/individual counseling services focusing on male development, fatherhood and/or working through current intra-family challenges.

Men in the Making (MIM)

MIM, currently operating at a Boston public charter school, is specifically targeting social-emotional development of urban minority boys.By out-posting our highly skilled clinicians and teacher-educators onsite at the school, we seek to improve student outcomes by enhancing teachers’ capacity to address social-emotional development issues students bring to class and by providing clinical support for students referred for counseling.The overriding goal of MIM is premised on the belief that, by reaching low-income, minority middle school boys as they begin most actively to expand their reach into the external world, there is an opportunity to disrupt the impact of community and family dysfunction that influences their behavior. Engaging their teachers in a fundamental change process creates a multiplier effect that can expand the chances for altering family and community behaviors and expectations.
Budget  $362,455
Category  Human Services, General/Other Children & Youth Services
Population Served Adolescents Only (13-19 years) Males Minorities
Program Short-Term Success  1. After participating in MIM's voluntary teacher training program, how many teachers report that the curriculum enhanced their ability to deal with specific in-class behavioral problems presented by boys.
2. Based on an analysis of the PEAR (Program in Education, Afterschool and Resiliency) holistic student assessment--completed by students at the beginning and at the end of each school year--how many boys
whose teachers participated in MIM training show notable social-emotional developmental progress.
3. Teachers have established behavior-altering relationships with boys in their classes; are able to identify barriers (educational, social-emotional, health, and environmental) facing boys; and are able to address them through referrals, services/increased capacity. Further, they feel better connected to internal networks and external resources available to support boys facing obstacles to success.
Program Long-Term Success 

• Clinical intervention effectively addresses boys’ troubling behaviors, moving them to age appropriate social-emotional, cognitive and intellectual development.

• Training helps teachers understand/address boys’ behaviors and increase their effectiveness in working sensitively with disruptive boys in school.

• Boys have ongoing relationships with caring adult mentors.

• Boys access social-emotional support needed to engage in positive intellectual and social development activities and create value for the community.

• Boys have self-affirming behaviors that lead to positive outcomes—i.e., reducing disruptive/risky behaviors.

• Teachers can identify barriers (educational, social, emotional, health, and environmental) facing boys and address them through referrals, services or increased capacity.

• Teachers establish behavior-altering relationships with boys in their classes.

• Teachers connect to internal networks and external resources available to support youth facing barriers to success.

Program Success Monitored By 
Behaviors of MIM participants--boys and teachers--are observed and recorded by Family Service staff.
The Efforts to Outcomes performance measurement system is utilized to: 1) track changes in teachers' understanding of male development and practical utilization of their knowledge; and 2) track changes in boys' behaviors.
Examples of Program Success  Given that we are attempting to address vital developmental needs of the most at-risk children and families in Greater Boston—people who face a myriad of obstacles in an effort to successfully manage their lives—and that such change often takes an extended period of time to be manifested, we are seeing
some positive signs of progress that may be attributable to MIM. Among them:
• Teachers appear broadly receptive to acquiring new tools and techniques for addressing students’ behavioral challenges.
• Teachers are learning more effective—i.e., more sensitive, less confrontational—ways of addressing boys’ disruptive behavior—and seeing positive results in changing behaviors.
• The number of in-school referrals for behavioral issues and discipline incidents is decreasing.
• Teachers’ time for class management, instruction and time-on-task is increasing.
• Overall classroom environment—students’ attitudes, behavior, and readiness to learn—appears to be improving.

Strong Start

Strong Start is a healthy child development program that delivers high-skilled mental health services to inner city early education centers to advance social-emotional and cognitive development for larger numbers of urban Boston’s youngest children.A notable feature of Strong Start is its focus on cost-effective inter-agency direct service delivery—i.e., matching Family Service's well-regarded clinical services with the needs of early education centers serving low-income children.In an era of declining public and institutional funding for human services, this collaborative model resonates.Strong Start significantly upgrades centers’ capacity to deal with the mental health needs of their children through site-based early education specialists who provide clinical assessments, child therapy, teacher training and consultation in childhood development, and parenting skill building.Our clinicians are out-posted daily at each of the program sites, working with children, their teachers and parents.
Budget  $391,544.00
Category  Human Services, General/Other Child Care
Population Served At-Risk Populations Poor,Economically Disadvantaged,Indigent Infants to Preschool (under age 5)
Program Short-Term Success 
Teachers report fewer children referred for discipline or, in rare cases, expelled for uncontrollable disruptive behavior.
Teachers report greater ability to assure effective class management and greater time on task, rather than digressing to address behavioral issues.
Teachers observe and report enhanced peer-to-peer and child/adult relationships.
Program Long-Term Success 

This healthy child development program will:

 ·      Strengthen the emotional resiliency and competency of children enrolled in urban Boston early childhood development centers.

·        Provide on-site mental health and agency-based intervention services for children identified as presenting social-emotional developmental issues.

·       Elevate centers’ professional service capacity by training and consulting with early education teachers to elevate understanding of and capacity to address early childhood developmental needs.

·       Help in educating parents of preschoolers to understand child development and to practice more insightful parenting.

Program Success Monitored By 

We track teacher progress in the ETO assessment system through a teacher checklist addressing behavior management and teaching skills. It is a synthesis of appropriate measures used in other instruments, e.g., the Inventory of Practices for Promoting Social Emotional Competence developed by the Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations for Early Learning, and the National Association for the Education of Young Children statement on Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8. The survey was administered in September 2011 and follow-up data is being collected in May/June 2012. Our teacher educators also use two required instruments for the Massachusetts Quality Rating and Improvement System (QRIS) for childcare providers—the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised/Infant-Toddler Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R/ITERS-R) and the Arnett-Caregiver Interaction Scale (Arnett/CIS)—to collect baseline data.

Examples of Program Success 

For example, in one toddler classroom at an early education center, transition to lunch was typically chaotic, with children sitting at their tables for as long as 20 minutes, awaiting lunch service. Even though teachers read stories during the wait time, the toddlers had difficulty staying at their tables. Our teacher-educator recommended that children engage in play activities until the lunch arrived and the tables set up—permitting teachers to assist the children in collecting their toys, washing their hands, and then sitting at the table to immediately start lunch. Trying this approach, the teachers noticed that the lunch transition went more smoothly—and there was a ripple effect, as, a few days later, the other toddler class also instituted this change.

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments



CEO/Executive Director Ms. Gisele M. Michel
CEO Term Start Apr 2015
CEO Email [email protected]
CEO Experience

Co-CEO --
Co-CEO Term Start --
Co-CEO Email --
Co-CEO Experience --

Former CEOs and Terms

Name Start End
-- -- --

Senior Staff

Name Title Experience/Biography
Patricia Kiessling Director, Family-Based Services --
Christina Luna Director, Center for Behavioral Health --
France Neff Director, Family Independence/Teen Living Program --
Lindsay Neill Director of Development and Marketing --


Award Awarding Organization Year
-- -- --


Affiliation Year
Alliance for Children and Families - Member 1996
Massachusetts Council of Human Service Providers 1996
Member of state association of nonprofits? Yes
Name of state association Massachusetts Nonprofit Network; Providers Council

External Assessments and Accreditations

External Assessment or Accreditation Year
-- 2011
Council on Accreditation (COA) [for Children and Family Services] - Accreditation 2011


Family Service has multiple collaborative relationships, among them:
Boston Public Schools
Nurtury, Inc. (lead)
College Bound Dorchester (lead)
MA Dept of Children & Families
MA Dept of Mental Health
Suffolk County Children's Advocacy Center
Martha Elliot Health Center
The Home for Little Wanderers
Children’s Hospital Boston
Boston Medical Center
Brigham & Women's Hospital
Neighborhood House Charter School (lead)
Boston Teachers Union Pilot School

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments


Foundation Comments


Staff Information

Number of Full Time Staff 44
Number of Part Time Staff 42
Number of Volunteers 50
Number of Contract Staff 0
Staff Retention Rate % 75%

Staff Demographics

Ethnicity African American/Black: 45
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 1
Caucasian: 26
Hispanic/Latino: 17
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 0
Other (if specified): 0
Gender Female: 77
Male: 13
Not Specified 0

Plans & Policies

Organization has Fundraising Plan? Under Development
Organization has Strategic Plan? Yes
Years Strategic Plan Considers 4
Management Succession Plan Yes
Business Continuity of Operations Plan Yes
Organization Policies And Procedures Yes
Nondiscrimination Policy Yes
Whistle Blower Policy No
Document Destruction Policy Yes
Directors and Officers Insurance Policy Yes
State Charitable Solicitations Permit Yes
State Registration Yes

Risk Management Provisions

Directors and Officers Policy
General Property Coverage
Accident and Injury Coverage

Reporting and Evaluations

Management Reports to Board? Yes
CEO Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Annually
Senior Management Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Annually
Non Management Formal Evaluation and Frequency Yes Annually


Board Chair Ms. Evelyn Moreno
Board Chair Company Affiliation Nixon Peabody LLP
Board Chair Term June 2013 - June 2016
Board Co-Chair --
Board Co-Chair Company Affiliation --
Board Co-Chair Term -

Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
Robert G. Bannish No Affiliation Voting
Alexy Boudreau, MD No Affiliation Voting
Stacy Cloutier Choate Hall & Stewart LLP Voting
Sarah Connolly No Affiliation Voting
Yael Frydman, DMD No Affiliation Voting
Deborah Gordon Network Health Voting
Daren Graves, Ed.D. No Affiliation Voting
Thomas Hart No Affiliation Voting
Dennis J. Leonard No Affiliation Voting
Evelyn Moreno Nixon Peabody LLP Voting
Joann Noble No Affiliation Voting
John O'Connor Community volunteer Voting
Amy Snelling No Affiliation Voting
Tricia Tilford No Affiliation Voting
Anne Trinque Grantham, Mayo & van Otterloo Voting
Christopher White Leerink Swan Voting

Constituent Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Youth Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Advisory Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
-- -- --

Board Demographics

Ethnicity African American/Black: 1
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 0
Caucasian: 13
Hispanic/Latino: 2
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 0
Other (if specified): 0
Gender Female: 10
Male: 6
Not Specified 0

Board Information

Board Term Lengths 3
Board Term Limits 3
Board Meeting Attendance % 75%
Written Board Selection Criteria Yes
Written Conflict Of Interest Policy Yes
Percentage of Monetary Contributions 100%
Percentage of In-Kind Contributions 30%
Constituency Includes Client Representation No

Standing Committees

  • Audit
  • Board Governance
  • Development / Fund Development / Fund Raising / Grant Writing / Major Gifts
  • Executive
  • Finance

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments


Foundation Comments



Revenue vs. Expense ($000s)

Expense Breakdown 2014 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2013 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2012 (%)

Fiscal Year Jan 01, 2016 to Dec 31, 2016
Projected Income $5,722,227.00
Projected Expense $6,820,627.00
Form 990s

2014 990

2013 990

2012 990

2011 990

2010 990

2009 990

Audit Documents

2014 Audit

2013 Audit

2012 Audit

2011 Audit

2010 Audit

2009 Audit

IRS Letter of Exemption

IRS Letter of Determination

Prior Three Years Total Revenue and Expense Totals

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Revenue $4,154,604 $9,930,914 $5,909,425
Total Expenses $5,776,116 $5,897,944 $5,988,055

Prior Three Years Revenue Sources

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Foundation and
Corporation Contributions
-- -- --
Government Contributions $1,515,711 $1,534,345 $1,478,455
    Federal -- -- --
    State $1,515,711 -- --
    Local -- -- --
    Unspecified -- $1,534,345 $1,478,455
Individual Contributions $1,054,157 $1,332,821 $1,177,585
Indirect Public Support -- -- --
Earned Revenue $2,178,568 $2,341,269 $2,166,025
Investment Income, Net of Losses $790,065 $2,380,122 $1,297,175
Membership Dues -- -- --
Special Events $146,384 $47,915 $169,374
Revenue In-Kind $34,716 -- --
Other $-1,564,997 $2,294,442 $-379,189

Prior Three Years Expense Allocations

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Program Expense $4,389,342 $4,493,766 $4,468,827
Administration Expense $979,718 $1,080,709 $1,096,424
Fundraising Expense $407,056 $323,469 $422,804
Payments to Affiliates -- -- --
Total Revenue/Total Expenses 0.72 1.68 0.99
Program Expense/Total Expenses 76% 76% 75%
Fundraising Expense/Contributed Revenue 15% 11% 15%

Prior Three Years Assets and Liabilities

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Assets $21,457,432 $22,141,636 $21,089,342
Current Assets $1,995,787 $1,876,422 $1,852,232
Long-Term Liabilities $6,971,418 $7,055,098 $9,956,888
Current Liabilities $1,812,251 $793,018 $871,904
Total Net Assets $12,673,763 $14,293,520 $10,260,550

Prior Three Years Top Three Funding Sources

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
1st (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --
2nd (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --
3rd (Source and Amount) -- --
-- --
-- --

Financial Planning

Endowment Value $10,500,000.00
Spending Policy Percentage
Percentage(If selected) 5.0%
Credit Line Yes
Reserve Fund Yes
How many months does reserve cover? 6.00

Capital Campaign

Are you currently in a Capital Campaign? No
Capital Campaign Purpose --
Campaign Goal --
Capital Campaign Dates -
Capital Campaign Raised-to-Date Amount --
Capital Campaign Anticipated in Next 5 Years? --

Short Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Current Ratio: Current Assets/Current Liabilities 1.10 2.37 2.12

Long Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Long-term Liabilities/Total Assets 32% 32% 47%

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

Beginning in 2005, we sought to balance growing subsidy requirements of our services—examining each program's fit with our mission; core competencies; long-term client benefit; and maximum return on investment. Programs deemed no longer consistent with our strategic direction and core mission were moved to other agencies. The resulting focus on children, youth and families matches the demographic profile of our constituency, and provides the best potential for societal return on investment, as prevention and behavioral health support position urban children and youth to make positive life choices and help families emerge stronger and more resilient as they cope with the challenges of inner city life.

 In the years since, we have continued to deal with external funding pressures. Planned operating deficits in recent years result from several factors:

 ¨       We serve a poor clientele, and publicly-funded services for the poor have been structurally under-funded by the state for 25+ years—as the state has conceded.

¨       Managed care approaches by Medicaid/other insurance programs have reduced reimbursed rates for care and introduced process barriers that extend delays for receiving timely payment for care.

¨       The public human services system, already financially-deficient, has been further devastated by the 2008-2012 economy, which led to historic cutbacks state funding, greatly impacting social service revenues.

¨       United Way changed its funding strategy in 2007 to fund workforce development and affordable housing by shifting money from children and youth, reducing our allocation by $600,000 annually.

 Beyond eliminating programs and closing a satellite office, we aggressively responded to these realities by:

¨       Refinancing a construction bond on our HQ building, reducing annual payments by over $550,000 annually.

¨       Freezing an employee defined benefit pension plan and moving to a 403(b) plan.

¨       Reducing health insurance benefits and eliminating other insurance plans.

¨       Selling a building used by teen residential program (while retaining the program).

¨       Launching an aggressive effort that signficantly enhanced foundation/corporate support.

¨       Increased Board of Trustees membership from 12 to 16, producing a greater development orientation.

¨       Revamped our website and developed a new agency brochure and promotional materials.

¨       Launched an annual gala that now contributes to our revenues.

¨       Undertook a major transition in our Center for Behavioral Health to generate increased revenues.

Our 2010 business plan further addressed our strategic goals and revenue development requirements.

Foundation Comments

Financial summary data in the charts and graphs above are per the organization's audited financials. Contributions from foundations and corporations are listed under individuals when the breakout was not available.
Please note, the Administrative expense category for fiscal years 2014, 2013 and 2012 includes building management costs. Also, the Other revenue category for fiscal years 2014, 2013 and 2012 includes recovery of accrued pension costs and provision for accrued post-retirement health costs.


Other Documents

No Other Documents currently available.


The Impact tab is a section on the Giving Common added in October 2013; as such the majority of nonprofits have not yet had the chance to complete this voluntary section. The purpose of the Impact section is to ask five deceptively simple questions that require reflection and promote communication about what really matters – results. The goal is to encourage strategic thinking about how a nonprofit will achieve its goals. The following Impact questions are being completed by nonprofits slowly, thoughtfully and at the right time for their respective organizations to ensure the most accurate information possible.

1. What is your organization aiming to accomplish?


2. What are your strategies for making this happen?


3. What are your organization’s capabilities for doing this?


4. How will your organization know if you are making progress?


5. What have and haven’t you accomplished so far?