Caring Connection

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840909174
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
5713667532
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$863
Expenses
$16,000
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID KERR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID KERR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $10,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization raises financial support for its member agencies, offers a recognized choice for giving in the work place, and provides other valuable human services to the community.

What it reported doing in 2020

Community outreach and business development - in addition to enhancing the likelihood that each nonprofit will attract appropriate attention during a workplace campaign, increasing the number of workplace campaigns each year determines the number of "employee views" each nonprofit will have. The more "employee views" the higher the probability of multiple pledges. Caring connection seeks to: - educate the community about the 'everyone-wins" benefits of workplace giving- inform business organizations of the numerous advantages of sponsoring annual workplace campaigns- sell individual businessess customized workplace campaigns- fulfill all aspects of a workplace campaign - planning through execution to celebrating success

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 3
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 35.9%; rating input score 36
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • 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: -1,754%; rating input score 4; 4th 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: 62.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 35.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $10K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2009 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.