Council of Supervisors & Administrators

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112024569
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2128232020
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,196,877
Expenses
$18,373,586
Assets
$79,764,658
Liabilities
$6,337,329

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Henry Rubio (President)
  • Nancy Russo (Vice President)
  • Samuel Akel (Vice President)
  • Katiana Louissaint (Vice President)
  • Moses Ojeda (Vice President)
  • Susan Barone (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Henry Rubio (President): $407,021 total reported compensation
  • David Grandwetter (General Counsel): $366,694 total reported compensation
  • Dale Kelly (Exec. V.P.): $330,247 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

CSA is the collective bargaining unit for approximately 6,500 Principals, Assistant Principals, Supervisors and Education Administrators who work in the NYC public schools and 200 Directors and Assistant Directors who work in city-subsidized Centers for Early Childhood Education (ECE). CSA also has nearly 7,000 retired school supervisors in its Retiree Chapter as well as more than 4,000 of their spouses and domestic partners.On behalf of its members, CSA negotiates salary, benefits and working conditions related to the administration and supervision of NYC public schools. CSA monitors the enforcement of its contract with the city and fights for members legal rights. CSA also provides exemplary professional development for its members through the Executive Leadership Institute, a non-profit branch of the union. CSA offers confidential mentoring to individual members through the Supervisory Support Program, a professional development program provided through the union's contract.

What it reported doing in 2024

.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.3%; rating input score 96; 30th 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: 32.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.34; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.2%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 78 of 81 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $407K · 18 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $927K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.