Oberlin Community Services Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
340907948
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oberlin, OH, USA
Phone
4407746579
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Emergency Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,264,631
Expenses
$1,096,805
Assets
$6,942,782
Liabilities
$31,715

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GAYLE BOYER (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN MOORE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARGARET W FLOOD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARGARET W FLOOD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $78,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Oberlin community services council is a responsive community organization that provides direct assistance, referrals, outreach and educational support to lorain county residents who struggle to meet basic needs.

What it reported doing in 2024

During the fiscal year, the organization provided approximately 49,000 points of service through its choice pantry and food delivery programs, giving away over 500,000 lbs of food to more than 3900 distinct individuals. The organization supplied csfp boxes to over 100 low income seniors, held pop-up produce pantries, sponsored back-pack food programs at oberlin and wellington elementary schools and participated in an oberlin meals on wheels program. The organization further provided support and casework for more than 750 households, offering over $176,000 in emergency assistance to individuals to cover housing, utilities, transportation and other miscellaneous needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $88.57 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 51.6%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.33; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $78K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.