Catholic Charities Tell City Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
451745026
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tell City, IN, USA
Phone
8125470903
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$223,306
Expenses
$189,647
Assets
$371,171
Liabilities
$7,146

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Bethuram (Executive Director)
  • Deacon Brad Anderson (Board Vice President)
  • Mark Sullivan (Board President)
  • Monsignor William Stumpf (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Brian Burkert (Treasurer): $171,829 total reported compensation
  • David Bethuram (Executive Director): $149,267 total reported compensation
  • Monsignor William Stumpf (Vice President): $28,010 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Catholic Charities Tell City is to work together as parish communities, fulfilling the call of the Gospel, and to help people improve their lives. We believe that through reaching out in service to those in need, by loving our neighbors as Christ loves us, we not only enrich their lives-but ours as well.

What it reported doing in 2024

Catholic Charities Tell City, Inc. offers other program services to benefit those in need including a budgeting class, a weekly hot meal program and a food and clothing pantry. 4 people graduated from the budgets basics classes and the weekly hot meal program served 3173 people during this year. During the months of November to March we give away free coats, hates, gloves, and scares to anyone who is in need. We gave away 214 coats, 264 hats, gloves, or scarves, and 33 blankets during this time.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 63.4%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 98.2%; rating input score 98; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.96; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 63.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $120K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $172K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.