Credit Advocate Counseling Corp
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 133917328
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2015–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2122602776
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $97,623
- Expenses
- $213,557
- Assets
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Steven Burman (President)
People named in this filing
- Steven Burman (President)
- Julia Berman (Board Member)
- Henry Reininger (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide financial literacy education through outreach programs throughout the community it serves and to assist consumers with budget planning and reducing credit card debt through debt management programs.
What it reported doing in 2015
To provide financial literacy education through outreach programs throughout the community it serves and to assist consumers with budget planning and reducing credit card debt through debt management programs. These programs are designed to assist consumers reduce credit card debt by consolidating payments, waiving fees, and reducing interest rates.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 4
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -118.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $181K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.