Guardian Angel Community Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362170860
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Joliet, IL, USA
Phone
8157290930
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,500,951
Expenses
$10,332,543
Assets
$7,653,571
Liabilities
$2,186,345

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • INES KUTLESA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • INES KUTLESA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $246,925 total reported compensation
  • MARY MCGAVIN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $143,324 total reported compensation
  • KURT MILLER (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $141,041 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to provide diverse services that inspire people to improve the quality of their lives in their greatest time of need

What it reported doing in 2024

Suzy's caring placethe goal of suzy's caring place is to reduce the incidence of homelessness among victims of domestic violence. Support services and rental assistance is provided to suzy's caring place participants, and the rental fee is based on the fair market value of rent costs in the area. Program participants sign leases directly with the landlord, and they sign a participant agreement with guardian angel that details program expectations. Suzy's caring place participants are responsible for costs of daily living beyond that of the fair market value rental costs covered by the program. Clients provide food for themselves and their children. The program originally offered a 6 -24 month stay; however, these timeframes may vary as they are contingent on the funding sources. Suzy's caring place is a voluntary program and participants may end services at any time, while the aim is to achieve permanent housing before ceasing services in the program.

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 80% for direct work, and 20% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.1%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.8% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $247K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.