Instituto Del Hogar Celia Y Harris Bunker Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
660215050
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rio Piedras, PR, RQ
Phone
7876790385
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$140,408
Expenses
$144,683
Assets
$85,706
Liabilities
$24,099

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joymarie Rivera Gonzalez (Executive Director)
  • Myriam M Matos Mercado (President, Board of Directors)
  • Raquel M Laporte Oneill (Vice-President, Board of Directors)

Highest reported compensation

  • Joymarie Rivera Gonzalez (Executive Director): $40,066 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Work to strengthen families as well as the optimal development and functioning of its members in order to enrich the quality of family life and achieve effective interaction with the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The commitment to preventive, educational and community work is aimed to individuals and communities that need support in their social and emotional development. The services include guidance, counseling, and psychotherapy, offered to individuals, family, couple or group session and group workshops. Depending on the program or project, the services are offered by a professional staff composed of psychologists, social workers and psychosocial counselors. Our main accomplishment is the development of special projects that bring a positive impact on people lives. These projects are intended to prevent or minimize domestic violence, aggression and child abuse and promote the integrity and stability of the family as a unit. For year ended June 30, 2025, the organization attended 322 persons with 1,760 hours of professional services given to them. Workshops assistance amounted to 39 persons.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 80% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.1%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 61.3%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.1% of revenue deployed · 61.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $89K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 44 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.