Osceola County Council on Aging Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
591595398
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kissimmee, FL, USA
Phone
4078468532
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,810,687
Expenses
$13,735,003
Assets
$14,986,636
Liabilities
$2,913,303

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SONYA DEESE-BYRNES (President Elect)
  • BOB HEALY JR (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • WENDY FORD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • WENDY FORD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $168,808 total reported compensation
  • Terrance Wilson (VP of Finance): $105,776 total reported compensation
  • MYLIKA MORTON (CFO): $99,000 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 organization's mission is to promote the physical, mental & social well-being of seniors, disadvantaged families, the disabled and their caregivers by providing meals, adult day care, social services, and a variety of other services for the elderly & disabled.

What it reported doing in 2024

Weatherization/chore program - the organization helps low-income homeowners permanently reduce their energy bills by making their homes more energy-efficient, and repair, renovate and maintain homes owned and occupied by elderly and disabled adults.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 65% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 95%; rating input score 95; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -16.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $12.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $169K · 30 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.