Child and Family Advocates of Cuyahoga County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
811209903
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2162963799
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Children's, Youth Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$515,116
Expenses
$511,756
Assets
$282,265
Liabilities
$11,401

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHANIE R SLOVASKY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRICIA KUIVINEN (EXECUTIVE DI): $122,530 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 cfacc is to make a difference for every child served through advocacy, education and collaborative alliances. Cfacc approaches child advocacy in a unique way, through the recruitment, training and support of casa volunteers who are assigned to advocate for the best interests of children in a family, whether one child or a sibling group. Casa volunteers bring different skills and perspectives; however, each has one common goal - providing the highest quality advocacy for the best interests of each child.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cfacc approaches child welfare and best interests advocacy in a unique way, providing court appointed special advocate volunteers (casas) who are assigned as partners to advocate for the best interests of cleveland-area children, whether one child or a sibling group. Casa volunteers investigate, monitor, and seek to preserve the welfare of children and vulnerable foster youth, making service referral, placement and permanency recommendations to the local juvenile court. Each casa volunteer brings different skills and perspectives to their role; however, each has one common goal - providing the highest quality advocacy for the best interests of each child. 2025 accomplishments include: - cfacc adminsiters the cuyahoga county casa program, overseeing the child-advocacy work of 96 active casa volunteers who served 156 children and youth in foster care in 2025. - cleveland casa volunteers recorded 3,877 child advocacy volunteer hours during 2025. - cfacc has served 951 unique children since our inception in 2016. - cfacc offered two casa pre-service training events in 2025, to prepare 21 new casa volunteers for service with local foster-system involved youth. - cfacc distributed over 500 books to young readers in 2025. - cfacc distributed approximately 30 backpacks with school supplies to youth in need. - cfacc provided 741 formal child welfare training hours; open to the community as well as active casa volunteers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.7%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 22; 22nd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 0.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.7% of revenue deployed · 73.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $375K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $123K · 21 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.