Georgia Council for Recovery Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
582045112
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4045233440
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,294,072
Expenses
$5,368,216
Assets
$1,510,735
Liabilities
$1,375,420

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURISA GUERRERO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAURISA GUERRERO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $111,258 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 organization offers training, information, resources and educational opportunities for professional and others who serve the substance abuse prevention, treatment and recovery fields.

What it reported doing in 2024

EDUCATION AND TRAINING - Develops and organizes the CARES curriculum by having focused conversations with stakeholders across the state of Georgia who work in the substance use disorder treatment and recovery support fields. Applicants attend a training course, pass certification exam, upon completion can provide planning to individuals and group recovery supports. GCSA conducts workshops and two MAR CARES Academy sessions targeting peers using medication to support their successful recovery. New staff orientation educates new staff at 4 of Georgias regional psychiatric hospitals by sharing their lived experiences and promote recovery resources in efforts to combat the stigma against individuals living with substance use disorder and mental health challenges. GCSA provides organizations across the country with technical assistance by identifying strengths within organizations, developing processes to overcoming barriers and collaborating across systems in the field of substance abuse disorder to bridge the gap across agencies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 92.9%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -1.4%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.91; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.9% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.2% of revenue deployed · 92.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $111K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.