Cds Wolf Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204311706
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Webster, NY, USA
Phone
5853414600
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,894,662
Expenses
$1,467,630
Assets
$27,110,754
Liabilities
$88,872

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW SEWNAUTH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • DAVID GREENMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ADVANCEMENT)
  • RICHARD FERRARI (EXEC ADVISOR TO THE CEO; TERMED 3/21/24)
  • SANKAR SEWNAUTH (PRESIDENT EMERITUS; FORMER CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW SEWNAUTH (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $502,440 total reported compensation
  • SANKAR SEWNAUTH (PRESIDENT EMERITUS; FORMER CEO): $417,066 total reported compensation
  • JUDY CONSADINE (CORPORATE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $381,325 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 cds wolf foundation and its affiliate companies empower people to live and thrive within their community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The cds wolf foundation and its affiliate companies empower people to live and thrive within their community. The cds wolf foundation works diligently to raise funds, offering continuity and support, to enrich the lives of veterans, individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, families, seniors citizens, and individuals with chronic medical conditions, to enhance programs, which include modern and affordable housing, recreation & day services, career counseling & employment, family support services, and clinical services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 11.6%; rating input score 12
  • Program expense ratio: 32.9%; rating input score 33
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st 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: 81.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.47; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 11.6% of revenue deployed · 32.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $483K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $502K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 42 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 47/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.