CSI Support & Development Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201935580
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Warren, MI, USA
Phone
5867539002
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$29,939,734
Expenses
$25,117,265
Assets
$138,117,918
Liabilities
$2,132,476

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHERYLE MOREY (PRESIDENT)
  • MARY DALESSANDRO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANNIE MITCHELL (FORMER PRESIDENT)
  • GLORIA PARRIS (FORMER VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANNE SACKRISON (ASSISTANT SECRETARY): $368,043 total reported compensation
  • MEL HUDSON (NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION MANAGER): $269,361 total reported compensation
  • DIANE SMITH (NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT MANAGER): $259,515 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Providing the highest quality, affordable housing communities for seniors.

What it reported doing in 2024

Csi support & development services, a Michigan non-profit corporation has as its principal business activity the development and operation of housing projects, primarily for low and moderate-income senior citizens, financed through federal, state and local agency programs. The housing projects are located in California, Maryland, Massachusetts and Michigan. The organization's main office is located in Michigan.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 62% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 97.9%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 32nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.1%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.5; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 97.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $368K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 95 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.