Lithuanian Catholic Religious Aid Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
112326652
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Maspeth, NY, USA
Phone
7183265202
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Roman Catholic
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,680,491
Expenses
$4,077,754
Assets
$17,001,829
Liabilities
$3,751,208

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ARCHBISHOP GINTARAS GRUSAS (PRESIDENT)
  • ARCHBISHOP LIONGINAS VIRBALAS SJ (I VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • REV JOHN PUODZIUNAS OFM (II VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • REV GEDIMINAS KERSYS (III VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • JURATE ZUKAUSKIENE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JURATE ZUKAUSKIENE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $61,355 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lithuanian catholic religious aid, inc. Supports catholic educational, religious, & social outreach projects in lithuania & dispora. Assistance is provided via financial aid to catholic parishes & dioceses. Aid is provided to catholic & other social welfare groups

What it reported doing in 2024

Lcra is an organization devoted to assisting the catholic church and it's institutions in lithuania. Assistance is provided to catholic parishes and dioceses and catholic social welfare agencies in lithuania.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 50%; rating input score 50; 29th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -142.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.17; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 12 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.