Resurrection Village Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453175894
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Buffalo, NY, USA
Phone
7168922489
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$88,692
Expenses
$161,669
Assets
$26,487
Liabilities
$262,828

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REV GARY STEEVES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • EMMA HENRY (CHAIR)
  • KAREN STURNIOLA (TREASURER)
  • CHERYL SMITH FISHER (SECRETARY)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Resurrection village corporation is a not-for-profit corporation organized to provide various social services to individuals and families in the western New York area, particularly the east side of buffalo, New York, and to facilitate the efforts of partner agencies in our community. These services include programs addressing food and nutritional needs, housing, healthcare, education, and family support services for the disadvantaged persons living in the east side area of the city of buffalo, New York.

What it reported doing in 2017

Provides a food pantry for needy people, manages a medical building providing essential healthcare to local residents, and provides a six week summer day camp.

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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 56.6%; rating input score 57

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -82.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 9.92; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.3% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 56.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $91K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.