Echo Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 540852799
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Springfield, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7035697972
- Rating
- 92
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Emergency Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,168,619
- Expenses
- $1,928,400
- Assets
- $3,624,908
- Liabilities
- $33,379
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Robert Vitter (President, Board of Directors)
- Richard Prosek (Vice President)
- David Goldberg (Vice President - Finance)
- Michael Baier (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Robert Vitter (President, Board of Directors)
- Douglas Taylor (Director)
- Nancy Sherman (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ecumenical Community Helping Others (ECHO, Inc.) provides food, clothing, housewares and limited financial assistance to individuals and families in need in the Burke/Springfield community. Our mission is guided by the core values of service, people and innovation: strengthening our community through compassionate support, treating all with respect and dignity and continuously improving how we serve through thoughtful, efficient solutions.
What it reported doing in 2024
ECHO assisted 1,410 unduplicated households, 5,295 individuals in FY 2025. During the year 479 households received assistance to pay bills for housing, utilities, transportation, and other essential needs. Clients received 314,552 pounds of food, plus $18,400 in coupons for fresh produce, meat and milk; 4,046 clothing bags; and household items valued at $144,215. In addition, 1,206 children received backpacks filled with school supplies. Included in the household items were 26 refurbished computers and 1,677 enrichment bags containing books and toys for children of client families. 385 families received holiday food, and 526 children from 221 families received holiday gifts. Although in-kind donations for clothing and housewares kept pace with need, food donations again failed to meet the needs of our clients and requests for help with rent and utilities remained high. ECHO continued to expand partnerships with vendors for purchasing food to meet clients' needs. This adaptation of the ECHO all-volunteer organization to continue to help neighbors in need is just one example of the maturity of its processes, and the selfless service of those who implement these processes.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 93% of its reported program spending out as 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 some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.8%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 98.5%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: $1,099.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 38th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.1%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 89.8% of revenue deployed · 98.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 30 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $695K reported
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.