Central Division Victim Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
233081927
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2157633280
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Victims' Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$986,301
Expenses
$955,568
Assets
$253,867
Liabilities
$20,033

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES SCHOFIELD (DIR. OF OPER): $81,944 total reported compensation
  • GABRIELLE RAINEY (DIR. OF VICT): $57,926 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Central division victim services (cdvs) is to foster a safe, prosperous, and resilient community with a focus of advocating for safe neighborhoods while supporting survivors of trauma due to violence.

What it reported doing in 2024

The victims compensation assistance program helps victims and their families through the emotional and physical aftermath of a crime by easing the financial impact placed upon them by the crime. Counseling services are provided to victims of crimes such as assault, robbery, and other such crimes which cause trauma. The clinical approach integrated in this practice would be narrative therapy which supports the healing process of those affected by violence. During this q1, 210 clients were served, which is an increase from our previous quarter. Out of the total number of clients served, 65 were african american, 20 were white, 12 were hispanic or latino, 1 was asian, 0 were native american, and 105 were not reported. Gender data shows that 136 clients were female, 72 clients were male, 1 was unreported, and one client was transgender. The primary types of victimization that our clients experienced were physical assault, robbery, domestic violence, and survivors of homicide. Direct services provided most often were information about victims rights, individual advocacy, and information about the criminal justice process. During this q2, 88 clients were served. Out of that number, 36 were african american, 14 were white, 6 were hispanic or latino, 41 were not reported. Gender data shows that 62 clients were female, 26 clients were male and 0 were transgender. The primary types of victimization that our clients experienced were physical assault, child domestic violence, and survivors of homicide. Direct services provided most often were information about victims rights, emotional support, and information about the criminal justice process. During the course of this quarter, the cdvs physical office was closed for renovations for a period of 6 weeks. Due to the physical closure, the amount of new clients who were able to walk in for services decreased. Cdvs was able to continue services through court accompaniment, referrals to external services, as well as filing for victims compensation services. During this q3, 245 clients were served. Out of that number, 70 were african american, 23 were white, 6 were hispanic or latino, 61 were not reported. Gender data shows that 109 clients were female, 73 clients were male and 0 were transgender. The primary types of victimization that our clients experienced were physical assault, child domestic violence, and survivors of homicide. Direct services provided most often were information about victims rights, emotional support, and information about the criminal justice process. Cdvs was able to continue services through court accompaniment, referrals to external services, as well as filing for victims compensation services. During this q4, 169 clients were served. Out of that number, 51 were african american, 12 were white, 9 were hispanic or latino, 42 were not reported. Gender data shows that 79 clients were female, 43 clients were male and 0 were transgender. The primary types of victimization that our clients experienced were physical assault, domestic violence, and survivors of child abuse/neglect. Direct services provided most often were information about victims rights, and information about the criminal justice process. Cdvs was able to continue services through court accompaniment, referrals to external services, as well as filing for victims compensation services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd 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: Limited
  • 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: NotApplicable
    • 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: 3.1%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.6% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $822K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.