Consolidated Credit Solutions Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592261789
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
Phone
9543779635
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$22,174,919
Expenses
$22,234,076
Assets
$6,045,783
Liabilities
$5,727,385

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • GARY HERMAN (OFFICER): $373,358 total reported compensation
  • IVAN REZVOY (OFFICER): $172,000 total reported compensation
  • ROMEO LIBREA (OFFICER): $164,318 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To assist individuals who are experiencing financial difficulties through professional counseling and financial education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Consolidated credit solutions offers loss mitigation and foreclosure prevention counseling, 1st time homebuyer education, a substantial financial literacy program, credit counseling, and reverse mortgage counseling. Consolidated credit solutions is committed to bringing financial education programs to individuals and families with a focus on households in low, low-to-moderate and moderate income census tracks. To accomplish this, consolidated credit solutions provides free, monthly community seminars and webinars on topics including budgeting, credit management, pre-purchase counseling, foreclosure prevention, and reverse mortgages.see attached statement of program service accomplishments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.4%; rating input score 93; 23rd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -0.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.95; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.7% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $19.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $373K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1 reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.