Community Support Systems Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521949052
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Brandywine, MD, USA
Phone
3013721491
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$415,903
Expenses
$416,635
Assets
$73,535
Liabilities
$12,359

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jennifer Hawkins (President)
  • Elaine Arnold (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ethel Sheperd-Powell (Executive Dir.): $51,233 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Community Support Systems' mission is to help low- and moderate-income families and senior citizens access services, to provide direct assistance, and to provide local programs that will raise the quality of life, dignity, and independence in the community. The board and the faithful community of volunteers work tirelessly to do one thing improve the quality of life of the most vulnerable neighbors in southern Prince George's and northern Charles counties in MD.

What it reported doing in 2019

The CSS Client Assistance Program had hundreds of beneficiaries during in the year that ended June 30, 2020. Clients received a variety of services including direct rent assistance, help paying utilities and other bills, help writing resumes, filling out energy assistance requests, obtaining school supplies for their children, working through difficult family situations, applying for photo ID, keeping medical appointments, finding housing and meeting many more needs. Limited financial help made the difference between an automobile that runs, has insurance, and current tags, the home that has heat, the rent or mortgage was paid, the baby-sitter paid, transportation to a new job was possible, shelter for the night, and more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $88.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.8% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $361K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $51K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2019
  • 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.

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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.