Catholic Charities Brooklyn and Queens

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112047151
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, US
Phone
718-722-6001
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$120,374,927
Expenses
$123,156,297
Assets
$61,609,776
Liabilities
$79,868,586

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REV MSGR ALFRED P LOPINTO (EXECUTIVE VP & CEO)
  • VERY REV PATRICK KEATING (DEPUTY CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • EMMIE GLYNN RYAN (COO/CHIEF OF STAFF/GENERAL COUNSEL): $364,408 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA COLLINS (SVP/CPO PROGRAM MANAGEMENT): $340,804 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE D'OTTAVIO (CFO): $325,584 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Catholic Charities Brooklyn and Queens helps all those in need, offering compassionate support regardless of a person’s background, status, or situation.

What it reported doing in 2024

Older adult services' one common goal for continuous quality improvement planning for all program models in fy 2025 remained reinforcement of the new approach in the aging field - supporting clients in communities as much as possible so seniors can remain in their homes as long as possible. The focus has been on bringing most required services to the clients in their place, and minimize referrals to nursing homes, assisted living, hospitals, etc. Intensive outreach and participation in activities to combat age- encouraging age-inclusive communities and highlighting the negative impacts of ageism on health, finance, and society. Older adult's centers have continued with aggressive outreach and re-engagement of seniors to increase operating capacity. Most of service units have been showing a positive trend for on-site activities as well continued increase in meal services. 9,831 unduplicated clients received services at 19 older adult centers. Blooming health, oas interfacing platform specific for the aging field, expanded the utilization across all programs. More daily/weekly reminders, invites to events, satisfaction surveys, inclement weather and emergency alerts were sent out through interface platform which helps to capture bigger membership and saves staff time. Programs continued assisting seniors in learning to access technology through more classes and intergenerational programs when community youth have one-to-one session with seniors. In the summer, ccns older adult centers were actively supporting seniors in communities of brooklyn and queens during heat emergencies as a part of network of cooling centers in response to city's heat emergency plan. Centers continue with education of seniors regarding ageism to promote and emphasize positive approach to stay healthy, mentally and physically as well as coordinated all advocacy efforts for funding of aging programs. Wellness activities have been expanding at centers as well. More health maintenance programs have been offered to seniors. Programs continued to expand and develop essential activities for seniors, such as trips to the pharmacy or grocery stores, to adding more recreational type trips such as visits to cultural institutions and other venues for leisure. This planning improved utilization of transportation service units. All our centers constantly update programming announcements on centers' websites also helped to reinforce outreach and re-engagement of seniors. Case management programs continued with home visits and assessments of homebound clients. Total clients for fy 25 served between swq and benson 1638. Decrease was due to many factors which included client terminations and not having dedicated staff to do outreaches for fy 25. Programs were able to reduce waiting list for services despite constant shortage in staffing. More reporting tools have been developed by funding source nyc aging, e.g. Monthly reviews of waitlist, assessment reviews and more. In june 2025 dfta transitioned to a new database called vive for queens alone as they were part of a pilot program. During fy 24 home delivered meals programs delivered an average of 1,671 meals over 249 days 416,079 meals overall by 2 home delivered meals programs- southwest queens & northeast queens hdmps. Swq received 6 vehicles from jasa to cover newly added cd 14 transferred from jasa to ccns. Programs also kept some vehicles from western queens. Swq hdmp moved to the new location to howard beach, on the ground of st anastasia. Social adult day care for senior with alzheimer's served 40 clients for fy25. It has received much positive feedback from caregivers on improvement in clients' cognition and great support provided by program's staff. Intensive programming and wellness/recreation activities showed much improvement to this population. The program provides much needed support to caregiver with its monthly caregiver support groups. Program has great recognition in the community. Program received con

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.3; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 14 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 91.4% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $110M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $364K · 26 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 84 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.