Crozierlife Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900703463
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2011
Location
South Bend, IN, USA
Phone
3172255442
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$147,137
Expenses
$185,635
Assets
$5,754
Liabilities
$9,216

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • RYAN CROZIER (EXECUTIVE DI): $36,000 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 awaken change and inspire freedom by empowering people to engage in social justice.

What it reported doing in 2024

Good bureau believes in rising leaders, committed to their vision. We believe they are the key to transforming romania. Our role is to help these change agents do more good. A passion to help rarely means that leaders have what they need to make the impact they want. Too often they lack the resources and community they need to bring their missions to life. Good bureau gets behind leaders to help accelerate their work in romania: we find leaders with incredible potential and provide them with funding, network, and support. They become game-changers for their nation. With enough capital the right connections and a community supporting them - these trailblazers are changing romania, for good. We believe that when we invest in leaders, we do more than help a cause.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 59% for direct work, and 41% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 57
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.6; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.4%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $153K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $36K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.