Covenant House Michigan

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383351777
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3134632000
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Residential Care & Adult Day Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,577,052
Expenses
$7,317,267
Assets
$11,693,003
Liabilities
$749,664

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM BEDROSSIAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • MEAGAN DUNN (CEO, CH-MI)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM BEDROSSIAN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $535,850 total reported compensation
  • MEAGAN DUNN (CEO, CH-MI): $202,881 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN GECK (DIRECTOR, DEVELOPMENT & COMM.): $156,496 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Medical (house of hope): includes medical facilities operated at and maintained by certain covenant house affiliates to provide immediate and ongoing medical attention to individuals receiving services at the site. Public education: covenant house uses a variety of platforms to inform and educate the public, government officials, and young people about youth homelessness and human trafficking. We employ websites, social media, public service announcements, billboards, newsletters, school-based programs, talks, lectures, and peer-to-peer events across our federation to raise awareness of the causes and impacts of youth homelessness and of the signs that a young person might be experiencing homelessness or human trafficking.schools: the covenant house academy charter schools program in Michigan provides services to young people including youth from caritas center and rights of passage who need support to complete their education and obtain employment. If youth have been suspended from school, the program provides general educational development classes, job training, and a reduction in the length of the suspension.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 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: -11.3%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.8% of revenue deployed · 68.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $536K · 21 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $140K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 25 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.