Catholic Charities

Legal name: Catholic Council for Social Concern Inc Catholic Charities

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
420680464
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Des Moines, IA, United States
Phone
(515) 244-3761
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,097,665
Expenses
$7,375,152
Assets
$7,890,872
Liabilities
$313,724

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BISHOP JOENSEN WILLIAM M (BOARD CHAIR & PRESIDENT)
  • SHEEHY MIKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DECKER BARBARA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (LEFT 10/2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • DECKER BARBARA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (LEFT 10/2024)): $119,577 total reported compensation
  • SHEEHY MIKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $25,581 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

For more than 100 years, Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Des Moines has been committed to transforming lives through service, guided by the core principles of Catholic Social Teaching. Our mission—Family-centered services that Empower Individuals and Strengthen Families—reflects our deep belief in the inherent dignity of every person and the importance of fostering strong, resilient communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Domestic violence and sexual assault support programs assisted 1,654 survivors of domestic violence, 249 survivors of sexual assault, and 7 survivors of human trafficking in fy25. Shelter was provided to 110 families, totaling 263 individuals for a total of 4,836 nights of care in shelter. Program staff and volunteers responded to 35 emergency hospital calls to assist survivors reporting domestic violence or sexual assault.

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 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 39th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.9%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 88.6% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $6.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.