Addictions Coalition of De Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510313758
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Claymont, DE, USA
Phone
3024160716
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Addictive Disorders N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$60,000
Expenses
$60,000
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM F NORTHEY JR PHD (PRESIDENT, C)

People named in this filing

  • PAUL PANTANO (CHAIR)
  • WILLIAM F NORTHEY JR PHD (PRESIDENT, C)
  • WILLIAM BOWLSBEY (MEMBER)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To reduce the damage created by addictions, including drugs, alcohol, gambling, sex addiction, and eating disorders, and assist individuals in the process of recovering their healthy and productive lives through public awareness, guidance, and connection to the proper services, including housing, employment, and substance abuse, gambling, and mental health treatment.

What it reported doing in 2019

Upgrade public awareness that addiction is a treatable disease and facilitate the creation and maintenance of a full network of addiction services, both public and private. Approximately 2,000 unduplicated individuals served.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.7% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -35.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $60K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 4 of 4 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.