Community Charity Advancement Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270257040
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Pompano Beach, FL, USA
Rating
37
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,989,411
Expenses
$10,001,188
Assets
$110,140
Liabilities
$1

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KERRY SHARON (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • KERRY SHARON (President): $78,000 total reported compensation
  • JOHN ROBERT THOMAS (Treasurer): $24,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide health care services, products and related assistance to those in need in the us and the caribbean and to provide support to breast cancer research. In addition, assisting victims who have lost thier homes to fire.

What it reported doing in 2017

Facilitate the delivery of medicines and medical supplies in the dominican republic in order to help victims of breast cancer and related illnessess in various hospitals and medical centers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 26
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29%; rating input score 29
  • Program expense ratio: 29%; rating input score 29
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.7%; rating input score 98; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29% of revenue deployed · 29% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 2 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $6.7M reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 29/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.