Josephs Home

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341901676
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2166965560
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,598,576
Expenses
$1,445,927
Assets
$7,009,695
Liabilities
$383,656

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Bethany Graham (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa Rogers (Assistant Treasurer): $415,705 total reported compensation
  • Miquel Chavez (Secretary): $222,450 total reported compensation
  • Bethany Graham (Executive Director): $146,820 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Joseph and Mary's Home, a ministry of the Sisters of Charity of St. Augustine, provides a nurturing caring environment for both men and women without resources who have acute medical needs helping them heal and achieve independence.

What it reported doing in 2024

Joseph's Home was established in 2000 as a ministry of the Sisters of Charity Health System (SCHS). Mary's Home was established in 2022. It is the only medical respite program providing temporary emergency shelter to homeless individuals in Northeast Ohio. Homeless men and women with acute medical issues, age 18 years and older, are referred through Cuyahoga County's Centralized Coordinated Intake. Joseph and Mary's Home 24 hour interdisciplinary team work with each individual through an integrated health approach to increase medical, financial and housing stability. After discharge services continue with care coordination and ongoing support to assist individuals in achieving long term medical and housing stability. In 2024, 45 men and 42 women were residents at Joseph's and Mary's Home, respectively.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.4%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.85; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53% of revenue deployed · 89.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $416K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 16 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.