Cooperative Services Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 381242615
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Warren, MI, USA
- Phone
- 5867539002
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $433,046
- Expenses
- $336,666
- Assets
- $4,807,040
- Liabilities
- $454,214
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
26 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHERYLE MOREY (PRESIDENT)
- ANNIE MITCHELL (FORMER PRESIDENT)
- ALEX AHO (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- ANNE SACKRISON (ASSISTANT SECRETARY): $368,043 total reported compensation
- MEL HUDSON (NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANA): $269,361 total reported compensation
- DIANE SMITH (NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT MANAG): $259,515 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 invest in housing facilities for low income senior citizens.
What it reported doing in 2024
Cooperative services, inc., a Michigan non-profit corporation, is a consumer cooperative wholly-owned by csi support and developement services. The company has as its principal business activity the investment in housing properties, primarily for low, very low and extremely low-income senior citizens, finance through federal, state and local agency programs. The apartment complexes are located in Michigan and Maryland. The company has also invested in an office building in warren, Michigan.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51%; rating input score 51
- Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 22.3%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.28; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 106.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -15.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -13.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $259K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $368K · 26 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 92 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.
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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.