Consumers Against Deceptive Fees

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
824495644
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
4402274848
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Consumer Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$0
Expenses
$137,355
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN W YELSIK (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER L VARHOLA (VP, TREAS. &): $1,000 total reported compensation
  • JOHN W YELSIK (PRESIDENT): $1,000 total reported compensation
  • JASON D STEFAN (BOARD MEMBER): $1,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Consumers against deceptive fees is organized to promote social welfare including but not limited to educating the general public regarding deception in consumer fees and billing practices.

What it reported doing in 2020

Consumers against deceptive fees is currently focused on educating the cleveland community. Our efforts to educate local consumers are critical because cpp rates have increased over the last several years and consumers are facing a higher burden each year. Our efforts are clarifying consumers on cpp rates, cost factors, and ways to change from a regulatory standpoint. Our education efforts include door-to-door visits to consumers in more than 5 cleveland wards. Consumer education is also provided through the organization's website as well as other forms of social media. Additionally, direct mailings are sent to thousands of public consumers.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 3
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: Limited
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -38.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -95.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -58.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $114K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2018 to 2020
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.