Macomb County Interfaith Volunteer Caregivers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383180665
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Roseville, MI, USA
Phone
5867575551
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations
Affiliation
Interfaith

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,078,849
Expenses
$685,611
Assets
$777,906
Liabilities
$-50,604

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CATHY LAWSON (BOARD PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KARYN DOMBROWSKI CURRO (EXECUIVE DIRECTOR): $84,556 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 Interfaith Caregivers program works to meet two mutually intertwined and equally important purposes to respond to the ever-growing needs of older and physically challenged adults who struggle to maintain their independence at home, while providing opportunities for volunteers to enrich their lives and live out their faith by helping others.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Interfaith Volunteer Caregivers IVC program provides assistance to hundreds of frail, older and physically challenged adults, allowing them to remain safe and independent in their own homes, and delaying or eliminating the need for long-term care.Services are provided by a corps of screened, trained and supported volunteers and include Friendly visits and supportive phone calls housekeeping and meal preparationhome repairs and maintenance indoor and outdoor chores respite breaks for family caregivers errands, shopping and food delivery transportation for medical appointments and other essential needs and a variety of other services that help older and disabled adults remain safely in their own homes. 451 volunteers provided 19,050 hours of assistance to 473 individual clients. During this year, the organization was fortunate to receive a large one-time donation of real estate, which added 480,000 to our typical revenue.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.6%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $686K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $85K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.