Crosby Commons Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061505334
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Shelton, CT, USA
Phone
2039448285
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Supportive Housing for Older Adults

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,781,546
Expenses
$4,533,393
Assets
$9,817,031
Liabilities
$2,667,238

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID FIFE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DAVID M LAWLOR (PRESIDENT/CHAIRMAN)
  • ZVONIMIR JUKIC (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE)
  • JON-PAUL VENOIT (PRESIDENT & CEO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • JON-PAUL VENOIT (PRESIDENT & CEO, ASSISTANT SECRETARY): $855,894 total reported compensation
  • DAVID M LAWLOR (PRESIDENT/CHAIRMAN): $829,570 total reported compensation
  • ZVONIMIR JUKIC (VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE): $195,241 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 provide a continuum of services that supports health, independence, and dignity. We build this continuum on the belief that a relationship-centered philosophy best sustains body, mind and spirit.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization is a 68 unit managed residential facility which serves seniors who may require assistance with daily living.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some related-organization disclosures are missing and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 70.6%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: Pass
    • 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: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.2%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.17; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.9% of revenue deployed · 70.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $856K · 22 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 19 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.