Queensboro Council for Social Welfare Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
111817497
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Kew Gardens, NY, USA
Phone
5169726289
Rating
94
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Coalitions

Reported finances

Revenue
$74,986
Expenses
$76,623
Assets
$105,353
Liabilities
$1,317

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Nancy Rojas (President)
  • Daniel Donoghue (Vice President)
  • Joan Serrano Laufer (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Nancy Rojas (President)
  • Daniel Donoghue (Vice President)
  • Christina Yang (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Senior counseling, Information & referral training on domestic violence counseling

What it reported doing in 2024

Health and Safety - Provide a common meeting ground for professionaland lay community individuals and groups for public and private organizationto plan together and establish services needed in the borough of Queens

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.6%; rating input score 98

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.2% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.7% of revenue deployed · 97.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $75K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.