Detroit Crime Commission

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452920005
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Southfield, MI, USA
Phone
3138889297
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Crime Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,045,381
Expenses
$943,204
Assets
$741,452
Liabilities
$561,052

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDY ARENA (EXECUTIVE DI): $62,400 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 lessen the burdens of government by facilitation the prosecution of criminal activity in areas where funding is insufficient, such as complex organized crime investigations. The organization conducts research and investigations, desseminations information to governmental agencies and the public, andcoordinates activities between business, government and law enforcement.

What it reported doing in 2025

The dcc currently has ten (10) distinct missions/initiatives, which are all designed to fill gaps in our public safety net. Most are the result of public safety requests, specifically, requests that public safety agencies (police and fire) cannot do for themselves due to lack of funding, expertise, or inflexible bureaucracies. However, not all ten dcc missions/initiatives are on at the same time. Of the dcc missions/initiatives operating consistently are; threat iq, done in conjunction with our local, state, and federal law enforcement partners, threat assessments are completed for world-class events, which if attacked by extremists would result in mass casualties. Another initiative that is always active (on) is our safeguard program. It is the temporary movement and relocation of witnesses of violent crime. Also, acting as the fiscal agent for law enforcement agencies is another initiative that runs throughout the year. Together, they represent about half of the dcc efforts. Started in 2012 as enough said (enough sexual assault in detroit) the name was changed to the detroit rape kit task force after the majority of rape kits had been tested. To this day it continues to be a partnership between the wayne county prosecutors office (wcpo) and the detroit police department (dpd) to identify and arrest rapists with the dcc acting as fiscal agent. As of september 2021, the task force had completed 4,166 investigations, with 92 awaiting investigation, and 224 convictions; most of which were serial rapists. The dcc is proud to be associated with this effort that brings pedophiles, rapists, and serial rapists to justice. Gang iq: is another one the dcc's missions/initiatives that is always on. It is one of the dcc's signature and unique commitments to public safety by using innovative software solutions and graduate level analytical skills to assist law enforcement to identify gangs, their structure, and acts of criminality. Costs for the software used to support gang iq is second only to salaries. Its contribution to public safety, public and private, cannot be overstated. The effort increases the effectiveness of the detroit community schools district police department through the use of technology in the face of shrinking budgets. Although the description is small, gang iq now represents a quarter of dcc activities. New beginnings initiative: new beginnings initiative is an offshoot of gang iq and focuses on thwarting gang related violence and dissolving the gang organization by giving its leaders and influencers a new beginning. The process combines research (data harvesting) and analysis to identify gang leaders and influencers with the goal of pointing willing participants towards community service organizations that deliver services designed to create an alternate future for gang leaders and turning such members into contributing members of society. To date, the dcc and its partner organization keeping them alive have shown nearly 50 gang members/influencers a new beginning. At the beginning of the pandemic in march 2020, this program went dormant for several months. However, reports of increased violence via gang iq, kick started the program for a few months, but lack of funding brought the program to a halt again. A new round of funding approved by the city of detroit will hopefully get the initiative started again. Another on-going initiative, the dcc's anti-human trafficking initiative: in an effort to combat human trafficking in southeast Michigan the dcc partners with law enforcement and private entities to investigate potential human trafficking rings and assist law enforcement in disrupting these rings. The dcc uses graduate level analysts (ms) and advanced data gathering software to capture "back page" type of data for analysis. Analysts are trained to look for signs of human trafficking to include persons involved and area of operation. To date, the dcc has referred more than three dozen suspected human trafficking

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.1%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.8%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.1% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $765K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.