Cocoon House

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911497667
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Everett, WA, USA
Phone
4252595802
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeless Shelters

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,222,253
Expenses
$9,119,305
Assets
$18,118,231
Liabilities
$10,389,056

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH ALONZO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSEPH ALONZO (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $175,527 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL MATHISON (CHIEF PROGRAMMING OFFICER): $129,465 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS WILLIS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $96,456 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Youth employment: snoco futures: cocoon house is the lead agency on a four-agency collaboration providing outreach to young people across the community and linking them to employment training, internships, and skills development. Funded through the workforce innovation and opportunity act (wioa), the program operates in partnership with refugee and immigrant services nw, seattle jobs initiative, housing hope, and workforce snohomish.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 71% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 86.6%; rating input score 87; 24th 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: 9 of 9 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: 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: 1.1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.99; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81.6% of revenue deployed · 82.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $7.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 14 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.