Community Senior Services Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 596161532
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Jacksonville, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9048071203
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,699,422
- Expenses
- $4,175,904
- Assets
- $23,224,030
- Liabilities
- $3,097,335
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TERESA K BARTON (PAST CEO)
- SAMUEL P HALL (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- TERESA K BARTON (PAST CEO): $350,634 total reported compensation
- SAMUEL P HALL (CEO): $215,104 total reported compensation
- LEE E WILSON (CFO): $175,214 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 the organization is to provide essential and innovative resources for individuals, families, and communities to prepare for and support graceful aging. This is accomplished through ownership and operation of subsidized senior housing and handicapped housing and by providing accounting, administrative and other support services to other non-profit entities that provide services to elders in need.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization provides administrative and bookkeeping services to urban jacksonville, inc. And its various operating divisions, as well as subsidiary clay county senior services of aging true. Both pay management and bookkeeping fees to the organization of a 70%-30% ratio proportioned to revenues earned, as does the nutrition services division of community senior services, inc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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: 40
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 76
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 40.1%; rating input score 40
- Program expense ratio: 47%; rating input score 47
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 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: 45.8%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.56; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 40.1% of revenue deployed · 47% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $351K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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.
- 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: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.