Share |

Prisoners' Legal Services (Massachusetts Correctional Legal Services)

 50 Federal Street, 4th Floor
 Boston, MA 02110
[P] (617) 482-2773 x 112
[F] (617) 451-6383
[email protected]
Elizabeth Matos
Facebook Twitter
 Printable Profile (Summary / Full)
EIN 04-2523362

LAST UPDATED: 07/26/2018
Organization DBA Prisoners' Legal Services
Former Names Massachusetts Correctional Legal Services (2010)
MCLS (2010)
Organization received a competitive grant from the Boston Foundation in the past five years Yes



Mission StatementMORE »

PLS promotes the safe, humane and lawful treatment of Massachusetts prisoners through civil rights litigation, administrative advocacy, client counseling and outreach to policy makers and the public.

Mission Statement

PLS promotes the safe, humane and lawful treatment of Massachusetts prisoners through civil rights litigation, administrative advocacy, client counseling and outreach to policy makers and the public.

FinancialsMORE »

Fiscal Year July 01, 2014 to June 30, 2015
Projected Income $1,578,771.00
Projected Expense $1,669,705.00

ProgramsMORE »

  • Prison Health Care
  • Prison Liaison Project
  • Rapid Response to Brutality Project

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

PLS promotes the safe, humane and lawful treatment of Massachusetts prisoners through civil rights litigation, administrative advocacy, client counseling and outreach to policy makers and the public.

Background Statement

PLS was founded in 1972. The organization emerged from the prisoners’ rights movement of the 1960s, which developed from popular movements in support of civil rights. PLS’ mission is to defend prisoners’ legal, civil and human rights, and advocate for minimal and least restrictive imprisonment through litigation, education, and public policy work. When PLS was founded, the prison population was a fifth of its current size. The issues we face have remained regrettably constant over time.
In the 1980s, overcrowding and mistreatment of HIV-positive inmates joined guard assaults; inadequate medical and mental health care; insufficient programs for rehabilitation, education, employment, and substance abuse treatment; discrimination based on race and gender; lack of physical and program access for handicapped prisoners; barriers to family, friends and legal visits; and abusive application of segregated confinement, as critical problems for our clients. During the 1990s, explicitly brutal executive policy abandoned rehabilitative for punitive goals throughout the prison system. Educational programs above those leading to a high school equivalency diploma were eliminated. Prisoner contact with the outside world was drastically diminished by ending furloughs and minimizing work-release placements, parole, media access and prison rehabilitative programs staffed by community volunteers.
During the last decade the HIV plague has receded in lethality, but hepatitis C exacts a relentless toll. Over one-third of the Massachusetts state prison population is infected with Hepatitis C - for women the proportion is above 40%. Jail authorities in Massachusetts refuse to treat Hepatitis C on the ground that the treatment takes longer than most county prisoners have to serve. The state department of correction has less than 100 treatment slots for Hepatitits C for approximately 4,000 infected prisoners. During the last ten years there has been an increasing focus on the imposition of civil disabilities beyond incarceration (CORI restrictions on employment, residence restrictions, sex offender registration for ever-more remote offenses, and the like) that contribute to the creation of a permanent underclass of homeless, unemployable social outcasts. Although there has been much talk about rehabilitation, the actual policy initiatives have all been in the direction of de-habilitation even after incarceration sanctions are served. 

Impact Statement

1. Settled, together with the Center For Public Representation, Bingham McCutchen, and Nelson Mullins  Riley & Scarborough, Disability Law Center v. Department of Correction, et al. The settlement commits the defendants to improving the treatment of prisoners suffering from serious mental illness who commit disciplinary violations.
2. PLS distributed restitution of more than $830,000 seized by the Bristol County Sheriff from prisoners in his custody for a daily "cost of care" and other fees which the sheriff lacked statutory authority to impose. The "refund" was ordered by the Superior Court in the matter of Souza, et al. v. Hodgson.
3. Participated in a coalition of community organizations to blunt the impact of terrible mandatory sentencing legislation.

4. Published a new and comprehensive web site at with a linked Facebook account.
Goal 1- Intake & Communication
Improve outreach and availability of intake to county prisoners.  Press county sheriffs to post contact information for PLS in common areas of cell blocks.
Goal Two - Health and Mental Health Care
Continue into the monitoring phase of the DLC v. DOC litigation on behalf of prisoners disciplined for disruptive behavior that is the result of serious mental illness (ongoing). 
Network with other health advocates and experts regarding overlapping interests.
Plan Health Law Advocates pro bono panel training; advise/assist attorneys with prisoner health care cases (such as with an outline for those who contemplate filing one).
Use public records requests to monitor systemic issues and for litigation development.
Goal Three -  Reduce incidence of guard on prisoner brutality
Develop and implement a plan to recruit private attorneys to represent prisoners in brutality cases. Expand the assistance we offer to private attorneys handling brutality cases and to pro se prisoners handling their own brutality cases.
Expand the number of cases that challenge brutality in county facilities. 
Goal Four - Challenge extreme conditions of confinement priority area.
Goal Five: Oppose inappropriate segregation and wrongful disciplinary practices
Challenge unlawful segregation, including: (1)  administrative segregation for violations of the DSU regulations, (2) segregation on awaiting action status for unreasonable time periods; (3) protective custody prisoners held in segregation conditions in violation of Blaney v. Commissioner; and (4) DDU prisoners denied credit for months in which they get a d-report.

Needs Statement

1. PLS would like to establish and actively manage a panel of attorneys willing to take prison cases on a pro bono or reduced fee basis.
2. PLS needs to further develop its individual donor base.

3. PLS needs to broaden its base of foundation support. At present the primary foundation support for the office comes from the Massachusetts Legal Assistance Corporation (MLAC), which funds only legal services, plus smaller grants from the Massachusetts Bar Association Foundation, the Boston Bar Foundation, and the G.H. Shaw Foundation, which support the office's health care and anti-brutality work.

CEO Statement

Prisoners' Legal Services (PLS) has been serving indigent Massachusetts prisoners for over forty years. Because of its longevity, PLS is seen not only as a primary voice in connection with prison impact litigation, but as the go-to resource for legislators, judges, public defenders, the clergy, families and friends of prisoners and the media in areas of criminal justice reform, public policy, prison conditions, parole, re-entry and recidivism. In other words, in addition to being a legal services office for poor prisoners in the traditional sense, i.e., providing prisoners with advice, brief service and litigation in some cases, PLS is also a knowledgeable, reliable resource for all three branches of government and the urban communities most prisoners come from and return to. PLS staff are involved with many coalitions across the state including a "school to prison pipeline" coalition that worked to have very positive legislation passed in 2012.
PLS faces many challenges. Eight lawyers for 25,000 prisoners is a very poor ratio and requires staff to regularly turn away prisoners with legitimate legal concerns, including grossly inadequate health and mental health care. Prisoners who are schizophrenic, suffer from bipolar disorder or post-traumatic stress syndrome, many of whom are veterans from Iraqi and Afghanistan wars, receive little or no treatment. Officials also refuse to approve kidney transplants for those with end-stage renal disease. The legal standards in health care matters is a very high bar but PLS files litigation when it can, advocates for ill clients or advises clients how to advocate for themselves.

Board Chair Statement

The 16-member PLS Board has a good mix of older and newer members with only one very long term member (18) years.  There is good gender balance (8 of 16 are female) and diversity (5 of 16 are people of color).  Five of the 16 Board members are prisoners or former prisoners.
Structurally, the PLS Board operates well. There is a calendar of meetings established and members receive agendas and materials in advance of each meeting. The bulk of the Board’s work is accomplished through its committees. The Development Committee has been especially active. In a recent survey, Board members responding to the survey rated the Board’s effectiveness highly. 

I have been the Board Chairperson for 8 years and am a partner at a law firm known for its advocacy on behalf of prisoners and the indigent.  I have an excellent working relationship with the Executive Director.  We are in contact almost daily. 

The PLS staff are remarkable. Intelligent, creative, hard-working, dogged and thorough, the PLS staff is held in high esteem by the Massachusetts prison population, the defense bar, civil rights attorneys, judges, the governor and several legislators. PLS is the only entity in Massachusetts that provides legal advice, representation, respect and hope for 25,000 prisoners. I am honored to devote my volunteer time to this highly professional organization.

Geographic Area Served

All state and county correctional facilities in Massachusetts.

Organization Categories

  1. Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy - Civil Rights
  2. Crime & Legal - Related - Legal Services
  3. Crime & Legal - Related - Inmate Support

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



Prison Health Care

More than one-quarter of PLS' work concerns prison health care issues. There is a focus on chronic and infectious disease control and treatment via both litigation and advocacy short of litigation.
Budget  $456,000.00
Category  Civil Rights, Social Action & Advocacy, General/Other Civil Rights
Population Served Offenders/Ex-Offenders Offenders/Ex-Offenders Offenders/Ex-Offenders
Program Short-Term Success 
1. End the Massachusetts Department of Correction's warehousing of prisoners with serious mental illness in isolation units as punishment for disruptive behaviors which are the result of mental illness. This is the objective of the settlement agreement in a specific, currently litigated federal case in which PLS is one of plaintiffs' counsel.
2. Ensure that Massachusetts state prisoners who are HIV positive have consistent access to medications that they must take several times daily. This is the objective of a specific case currently being litigated by PLS.
3. Reduce the rates charged prisoners for phone calls to their families and lawyers to rates comparable to those charged in other states. This is the objective of an ongoing state administrative proceeding in which PLS represents the petitioners.
Program Long-Term Success 
1. Eliminate deliberate indifference to serious medical needs of Massachusetts prisoners via litigation and advocacy. This is the first of four primary areas of PLS work.
2. Eliminate the use of unlawful and excessive force in the management of people in Massachusetts prisons and jails. This is the second of four primary areas of PLS work.
3. Ensure that state prisons and county jails in Massachusetts are not operated above capacity and that educational, work, and rehabilitative programs are available to all prisoners who need and want them. This is the third of four primary areas of PLS work.
4. End the routine use of segregation and isolation as management and punishment in Massachusetts prisons and jails. This is the fourth of four primary areas of PLS work.
Program Success Monitored By  The outcome of litigation is conventionally assessed: win, lose, or settle. Additionally, in civil rights litigation a good criterion for assessment of success is whether plaintiffs obtain an award of (or a settlement including) attorneys' fees, because to do so plaintiff must have secured court intervention requiring a significant alteration in defendant's policy or practices to the advantage of plaintiffs.
Examples of Program Success 
In the spring of 2012, PLS secured the return to prisoners and former prisons in the Bristol County House of Correction of more than $840,000 that had been seized from them by the sheriff to pay unauthorized "cost of care" fees (basically, cell rent). This court victory has also caused the Essex County Sheriff to stop collecting similar unlawful fees from prisoners in his custody.
Early in 2012 the U.S. District Court for Massachusetts approved a settlement agreement between the Disability Law Center (represented by PLS and other legal services and private attorneys) and the Massachusetts Department of Correction that obligates the DOC to provide mental health treatment to prisoners with serious mental illness who violate prison rules as a result of their illness. The agreement includes a commitment by the DOC to establish secure mental health treatment units to house these ill prisoners.

Prison Liaison Project

PLS matches its staff attorneys and paralegals with specific prisons and jails. Advocacy staff develop contacts with prisoners in those institutions and visit them regularly to assess problems of special concern in each location and the general "climate" in those facilities.  Liaison visits provide valuable background for both non-litigation advocacy and assessment of issues for possible litigation.
Budget  $25,000.00
Category  Civil Rights, Social Action & Advocacy, General/Other Civil Rights
Population Served Offenders/Ex-Offenders Offenders/Ex-Offenders Offenders/Ex-Offenders
Program Short-Term Success  Typically the Prison Liaison Project identifies adverse policy changes or adverse changes in prison conditions that impact PLS' clients on an institution - wide or (in the case of the Massachusetts Department of Correction) sytem - wide basis. Examples would be confiscatory property policies or an influx of additional prisoners into an already overcrowded jail or house of correction that results in conversion of gymnasium or classroom space into dormitories, or even in people sleeping on the floor of common areas or hallways. These types of deterioration are sometimes addressable by litigation.
Program Long-Term Success  This project is a feature of PLS' general operations. It is an aid to our work because it develops relationships with incarcerated men and women which helps familiarize them with our work and at the same time keeps PLS updated on the current concerns of the prison population.
Program Success Monitored By  Where information developed via the Prison Liaison Project leads to litigation, success is demonstrable via the extent to which the litigation achieves its objectives.
Examples of Program Success 

 Souza v. Hodgson- Class action challenge to pay-for-stay fees, as well as fees for medical care, haircuts, and GED services, at Bristol County Jail and House of Correction.  The court allowed our motion for summary judgment in July of 2004. In August 2004, the single justice denied the Sheriff’s motion relief pending appeal.  On March 30, 2005, the court allowed our motion for class certification, and ordered the Sheriff to return the fees. The Sheriff appealed the judgment. On January 5, 2010, the Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the lower court’s ruling in all respects.  On January 7, 2011, the court approved the process for prisoners to get back the fees with interest.  Checks were mailed to eligible class members on May 3, 2012.

Rapid Response to Brutality Project

This project provides rapid prison visits by PLS attorneys or paralegals to calls and letters alerting the office to instances of staff-on-prisoner violence. Generally visits are made within 72 hours of receipt of the report of the incident. The responding staff member brings a camera to document visible injuries. The project is limited to the highest security prisons: Souza Baranowski Correctional Center in Shirley, the segregation and disciplinary detention units at MCI-Cedar Junction at Walpole, and MCI-Framingham, Massachusetts' women's prison. The project is modeled on human rights violation documentation initiatives in other nations, especially in Latin America. The reports generated by these visits have several uses, such as providing a basis for evaluating incidents for litigation and providing background information on the "climate" in the state's highest security units.
Budget  $100,000.00
Category  Civil Rights, Social Action & Advocacy, General/Other Civil Rights
Population Served Offenders/Ex-Offenders Offenders/Ex-Offenders Offenders/Ex-Offenders
Program Short-Term Success  The primary short term benefit of this program is to provide brutalized prisoners with a sense that they are not completely abandoned and forgotten.
Program Long-Term Success  The long term objective of this initiative is to reduce guard-on-prisoner violence through monitoring and litigation.
Program Success Monitored By  The best indicator of success of this program is the insistence by prisoners that it continue. This has been a constant - the project was begun at the suggestion of prisoner clients, who continue to support it whether  litigation is deemed feasible in a given instance or not.
Examples of Program Success  The frequency of serious injury of prisoners involved in altercations with guards in the covered high security units has generally decreased in the several years the project has been operating.

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

Executive Director Programs Comments
PLS has several programs, but they are not really separate as they form part of the organization's core operations. There is the health care work, which began with a focus on chronic and infectious disease (originally primarily HIV), but now encompasses all prison medical issues. That is more than one quarter of all PLS work. There is also the Prison Brutality and Civil Rights Project, which documents staff assaults on prisoners and evaluates those incidents for referral to outside counsel or direct litigation by PLS. PLS always has multiple staff assault cases in litigation.
Health care and staff assaults are priority areas of work as well as projects; segregation/ isolation and general conditions of confinement are the other two priority areas of work and are reflected in PLS' litigation docket as well as its brief service work. PLS attorneys and paralegals handle approximately 2500 brief service matters annually. Those matters range from simple advice to advocacy that continues for many months. Brief service is a substantial part of the work load of all PLS advocates. 


CEO/Executive Director Ms. Leslie Walker Esq.
CEO Term Start Feb 2001
CEO Email [email protected]
CEO Experience
16 years at the Committee For Public Counsel Services (public defender's office), of which 5 years were as a criminal defense trial attorney, and 11 years were as a manager overseeing the assignment of criminal appeals to private counsel.
17 years as Executive Director at Prisoners' Legal Services.
Co-CEO --
Co-CEO Term Start --
Co-CEO Email --
Co-CEO Experience --

Former CEOs and Terms

Name Start End
Leslie Walker Jan 2001 July 2018
Mr. Peter Costanza Esq. Sept 1999 Feb 2001

Senior Staff

Name Title Experience/Biography
Mr. James Pingeon Esq. Litigation Director --
Mr. Albert Troisi Senior Paralegal --


Award Awarding Organization Year
Leadership and Legal Advocacy Award Disability Law Center 2012


Affiliation Year
-- --
Member of state association of nonprofits? No
Name of state association --

External Assessments and Accreditations

External Assessment or Accreditation Year
-- --


Prisoners Family Groups
Families Against Mandatory Minimums
Coalition for Effective Public Safety
Criminal Justice Policy Coalition
Health Law Advocates
Disability Law Center
Center For Public Representation
Coalition For Friends and Relatives of Prisoners

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

The overall challenge facing PLS today is that of securing long-term resources that will enable the organization to  continue its long-time representation and advocacy on behalf of prisoners in the areas of health care, combating staff violence, opposing segregation and isolation, and controlling overcrowding in state prisons and county jails, while at the same time expanding its recent initiatives towards coalition building with community organizations in particular. The office has long recognized the importance of working with organizations in the communities from which prisoners are disproportionately drawn, but recent legislative turmoil, which has included both actual reform proposals and very bad policy initiatives, have elicited community response which PLS has supported and informed. Real progress in criminal justice policy requires education and mobilization across a broad social spectrum, and participating effectively in such initiatives requires time and talent which is a challenge to find and fund.

Foundation Comments


Staff Information

Number of Full Time Staff 14
Number of Part Time Staff 3
Number of Volunteers 2
Number of Contract Staff 0
Staff Retention Rate % 100%

Staff Demographics

Ethnicity African American/Black: 2
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 0
Caucasian: 13
Hispanic/Latino: 2
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 0
Other (if specified): 0
Gender Female: 11
Male: 6
Not Specified 0

Plans & Policies

Organization has Fundraising Plan? Yes
Organization has Strategic Plan? Yes
Years Strategic Plan Considers 5
Management Succession Plan No
Business Continuity of Operations Plan No
Organization Policies And Procedures Under Development
Nondiscrimination Policy Yes
Whistle Blower Policy No
Document Destruction Policy No
Directors and Officers Insurance Policy Yes
State Charitable Solicitations Permit Yes
State Registration Yes

Risk Management Provisions


Reporting and Evaluations

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


Board Chair Ms. Patricia Garin Esq.
Board Chair Company Affiliation Shapiro, Weissberg & Garin LLP
Board Chair Term Sept 2008 - Aug 2014
Board Co-Chair --
Board Co-Chair Company Affiliation --
Board Co-Chair Term -

Board Members

Name Company Affiliations Status
Mr. Douglas S. Brooks Esq. LibbyHoops, P.C. Voting
Mr. Raymond Champagne Client Voting
Mr. Celestino Colon Client Voting
Dr. Elizabeth Davis MD Psychiatry --
Mr. Robert Fleischner Esq. Center For Public Representation Voting
Ms. Patricia Garin Esq. Stern, Shapiro, Weissberg & Garin Voting
Mr. Tony Gaskins Client Voting
Mr. Mac Hudson Client Voting
Ms. Joan Johnston Community Volunteer Voting
Mr. Charles Murphy Harvard Street Neighborhood Health Center --
Ms. Lisa Newman-Polk Community Volunteer --
Ms. Mala Rafik Esq. Rosenfeld Rafik & Sullivan Voting
Mr. James Rollins Esq. Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough Voting
Mr. Robert Sable Esq. Community Volunteer Voting
Ms. Zeno Williams Client 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: 3
Asian American/Pacific Islander: 1
Caucasian: 13
Hispanic/Latino: 1
Native American/American Indian: 0
Other: 0
Other (if specified): 0
Gender Female: 8
Male: 10
Not Specified 0

Board Information

Board Term Lengths 1
Board Term Limits 0
Board Meeting Attendance % 75%
Written Board Selection Criteria No
Written Conflict Of Interest Policy Yes
Percentage of Monetary Contributions 69%
Percentage of In-Kind Contributions 0%
Constituency Includes Client Representation Yes

Standing Committees

  • Development / Fund Development / Fund Raising / Grant Writing / Major Gifts
  • Executive
  • Finance
  • Nominating

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments

Board Chair Statement
The PLS staff are remarkable. Intelligent, creative, hard-working, dogged and thorough, the PLS staff are held in high esteem by the Massachusetts prison population, the defense bar, civil rights attorneys, judges, the governor, and several legislators. PLS is the only entity in Massachusetts that provides legal advice, representation, respect and hope for 25,000 prisoners. I am honored to devote my volunteer time to this highly professional organization.
There are several areas that PLS should devote more attention to: board development, increased board involvement in fundraising and new member orientation. Given the need for increased funding, PLS should recruit additional board members whose backgrounds, experience and professional networks are beneficial to the program's fundraising. Existing board members should be given specific tasks to complete that support fundraising and the board member orientation should be revised to include an emphasis on board members' roles and responsibilities for fundraising.

Foundation Comments



Revenue vs. Expense ($000s)

Expense Breakdown 2014 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2013 (%)

Expense Breakdown 2012 (%)

Fiscal Year July 01, 2014 to June 30, 2015
Projected Income $1,578,771.00
Projected Expense $1,669,705.00
Form 990s

2014 Form 990

2013 Form 990

2012 Form 990

2011 Form 990

2010 Form 990

2009 Form 990

2008 Form 990

Audit Documents

2014 Audited Financials

2013 Audited Financials

2012 Audited Financials

2011 Audited Financials

2010 Audited Financials

2009 Audited Financials

IRS Letter of Exemption

IRS Letter of Determination

Prior Three Years Total Revenue and Expense Totals

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Revenue $1,487,200 $1,654,434 $1,749,718
Total Expenses $1,669,717 $1,595,950 $1,581,347

Prior Three Years Revenue Sources

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Foundation and
Corporation Contributions
-- -- $104,650
Government Contributions $1,129,584 $981,810 $902,016
    Federal -- -- --
    State -- -- --
    Local -- -- --
    Unspecified $1,129,584 $981,810 $902,016
Individual Contributions $342,212 $283,298 $251,034
Indirect Public Support -- -- --
Earned Revenue $15,250 $386,235 $489,756
Investment Income, Net of Losses $154 $171 $2,262
Membership Dues -- -- --
Special Events -- -- --
Revenue In-Kind -- -- --
Other -- $2,920 --

Prior Three Years Expense Allocations

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Program Expense $1,241,997 $1,244,549 $1,434,998
Administration Expense $223,847 $225,634 $72,696
Fundraising Expense $203,873 $125,767 $73,653
Payments to Affiliates -- -- --
Total Revenue/Total Expenses 0.89 1.04 1.11
Program Expense/Total Expenses 74% 78% 91%
Fundraising Expense/Contributed Revenue 14% 10% 6%

Prior Three Years Assets and Liabilities

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Total Assets $775,333 $983,297 $912,322
Current Assets $758,133 $930,586 $889,155
Long-Term Liabilities $47,317 $51,335 $53,366
Current Liabilities $182,830 $204,259 $189,737
Total Net Assets $545,186 $727,703 $669,219

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 --
Spending Policy N/A
Percentage(If selected) --
Credit Line Yes
Reserve Fund Yes
How many months does reserve cover? 3.00

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? No

Short Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Current Ratio: Current Assets/Current Liabilities 4.15 4.56 4.69

Long Term Solvency

Fiscal Year 2014 2013 2012
Long-term Liabilities/Total Assets 6% 5% 6%

CEO/Executive Director/Board Comments


Foundation Comments

Financial summary data in charts and graphs are per the organization's IRS 990s.  Contributions from foundations and corporations are listed under individuals when the breakout was not available.


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?