Association of Community Services of Howard County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521320048
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Columbia, MD, USA
Phone
4435187701
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$362,210
Expenses
$403,541
Assets
$327,733
Liabilities
$15,913

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LOIS MIKKILA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JENNIFER BRODERICK (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDY MASTERS (VICE-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LOIS MIKKILA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $78,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Acs' mission is to champion, strengthen, and connect howard county nonprofits.

What it reported doing in 2024

Nonprofit capacity building: acs provides training workshops, community conversations with community leaders, and other resources to strengthen the knowledge, skills, and connections of nonprofit organizations. Our programs create space for learning, shared problem-solving, and meaningful collaboration. A key component of our capacity building work is hoco excel, howard county's nonprofit 'excelerator' program, created to grow the capacity, impact, and sustainability of county nonprofits. Hoco excel includes two components: training workshops open to all local nonprofits and a cohort of selected nonprofits that also receive individualized coaching and grant funding over a 3-year period.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 62.7%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 62.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $253K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.