Saint Vincent De Paul Society Toledo

Legal name: Diocesan Council of Toledo Society of St Vincent De Paul

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454368237
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Toledo, OH, USA
Phone
4192445171
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$694,332
Expenses
$557,658
Assets
$1,757,649
Liabilities
$4,737

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEBORAH BARTLETT-KARBOWIAK (DIOCESAN COUNCIL PRESIDENT)
  • DENNIS INKROTT (DISTRICT 2 PRESIDENT)
  • DOUG BULLIMORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUG BULLIMORE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $30,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Society of St. Vincent de Paul Toledo (SVdP) offers person-to-person assistance to those in need and provides help while conscientiously maintaining the confidentiality and dignity of those served. ”The poor will always be with us.”** The Society of St. Vincent de Paul Toledo (SVdP) offers assistance to those in need on a person-to-person basis. It is this personalized involvement that makes the work of the Society unique. This aid may take the form of intervention, consultation, or often through direct dollar or in-kind service. SSVdP offers those struggling to make ends meet help with utility bills, mortgage or rent payments, food, and transportation to name a few. An essential precept of the Society’s work is to provide help while conscientiously maintaining the confidentiality and dignity of those who are served. The Society recognizes that it must assume, also, a role of...

What it reported doing in 2024

The council supports the districts and conferences that report to them. They have met the requests for funding from the conferences and helped the conferences to develop their spiritual life, to intensify their service and to diversify their activities so that they may always be responsive to the needs of those who suffer.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 71% 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

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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.5%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.15; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.4%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 82.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $558K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $30K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.