Mary J Treglia Community House

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
420681107
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sioux City, IA, USA
Phone
7122585137
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,132,398
Expenses
$995,699
Assets
$1,066,714
Liabilities
$659,728

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THERESA WEAVER (PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTIAN SUPIOT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BARBARA NEWHOUSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BARBARA NEWHOUSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $52,400 total reported compensation
  • SALLY HARTLEY (SECRETARY): $3,678 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 misssion is to welcome, empower, educate and advocate for for new siouxland families

What it reported doing in 2024

Immigrant services-the community house is recognized by the department of justice (doj) to provide immigration legal services and is the only local non-profit that is dok accredited with licensed attorneys. It is also a remote settlement organization under an agreement ith the united state conference of catholic bishops migration and refugee services. Experienced instructors lead english language learner and citizenship classes at the community house. Bilingual staff and volunteers provide translation adn interpretation in 8 languages

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.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.9%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $64.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th 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: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th 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: 73.9% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $837K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.