Depaul USA Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352338110
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3122828953
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeless Shelters

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,662,134
Expenses
$12,072,284
Assets
$12,969,076
Liabilities
$3,690,628

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES W LEVESQUE (PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRE)
  • SANDRA GUILLORY (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES W LEVESQUE (PRESIDENT & EXECUTIVE DIRE): $120,230 total reported compensation
  • SANDRA GUILLORY (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $103,556 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide services and programs for homeless individuals in 12 cities across the united states.

What it reported doing in 2025

In new orleans, Louisiana, st. Louis, Missouri, philadelphia, Pennsylvania, leavenworth, Kansas and macon, Georgia, depaul USA offers long-term supportive housing coupled with case management to people who have experienced homelessness.in chicago, Illinois, los angeles, California, New York city, New York, philadelphia, Pennsylvania, depaul USA dax programs offer transitional housing coupled with case management for college students facing homelessness and housing insecurity. In philadelphia, Pennsylvania, pine bluff Arkansas, and greenwood, Mississippi depaul USA offers emergency and transitional housing to single adults experiencing homelessness or recently released from institutions who would otherwise enter the shelter system. In little rock, Arkansas, pine bluff, Arkansas, macon, Georgia, and los angeles, California, depaul USA operates day resource centers for homeless men and woman that offer comprehensive services.depaul USA also operates three social enterprises in macon, Georgia, philadelphia, Pennsylvania and st. Louis, Missouri whose profits fund local programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
  • 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 85.3%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $35.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.3% of revenue deployed · 85.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.