Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
730636561
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4055233000
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,095,566
Expenses
$12,188,162
Assets
$36,977,600
Liabilities
$1,696,520

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Amanda Harding (Vice President)
  • David Madigan (President)
  • Patrick Raglow (Executive Director)
  • David Ashton (Senior Vice President)
  • Monica Palmer (Senior Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Patrick Raglow (Executive Director): $150,869 total reported compensation
  • Nathan Cross (Chief Financial Officer (END:10/2024)): $115,546 total reported compensation
  • Monica Palmer (Senior Vice President): $105,037 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Guided by catholic teaching, catholic charities serves those in need, regardless of their faith, through transformative, empowering, and dignity-affirming social service programs that seek to eliminate material, emotional and spiritual poverty.

What it reported doing in 2024

Family support services - emergency rent and utility assistance - provides limited financial assistance for rent and utility bills to families struggling to achieve self-sufficiency. Once approved for assistance, families must participate in a one-time budgeting course and are strongly urged to enroll in family h.o.p.e. Case management. Families may access this assistance annually and a set number of families are assisted per week. - family h.o.p.e. Case management- offers strength-based case management that builds partnerships with families threatened by homelessness and severe financial stressors to eliminate barriers to success and self-sufficiency. - transitional housing- provides affordable housing to low-income families and individuals. To be eligible to live in housing units, adult family members must enroll in the family h.o.p.e. Program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 73.3%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.03; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.6% of revenue deployed · 73.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $8.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $151K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $255K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.