Retired and Senior Volunteer Program of the Capital Region Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237242872
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Camp Hill, PA, USA
Phone
7175419521
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$457,669
Expenses
$422,452
Assets
$20,680
Liabilities
$177,192

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BONNIE CLAPP (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CAROL A OMAN (EXEC DIRECTOR): $54,004 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide opportunities for persons of retirment age to participate in volunteer services.

What it reported doing in 2020

Retired and senior volunteer program (rsvp) of the capital region is a volunteer-based organization servicing the central pa region for more than 40 years. We recruit, train and place volunteers in not-for-profit agencies, schools, government offices, hospitals and senior residences. Our volunteers serve communities in adams, cumberland, dauphin, franklin, lancaster, lebanon, perry and york counties.rsvp passionately promotes seniors as powerful contributors to our neighborhoods and community organizations that desperately need additional human resources. At the same time, volunteers themselves are enhanced by the volunteer experience, often displaying visable improvement.rsvp of the capital region began providing services for residents of three central pa counties in 1972. Today, we are proud to reach the 8 counties previously mentioned. We support 1,350 volunteers in service. They provide over 75,000 hours of documented service for 148 agencies, schools, senior residences, hospitals and government agencies.many programs we offer are essential to your community, including meals on wheels, congregate feeding sites, food banks, and senior transportation.rsvp also develops and operates free community programs benefiting children and youth and the environment utilizing community volunteers including: - after school and summer programming in lower dauphin school districts - gardens of youth in steelton and highspire district - elementary reading and math tutoring throughout the eight county area - countdown to kindergarten in lower dauphin school district

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $177.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.7%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 8.57; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.6% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $378K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.