Senior Victim Services Inc of Delaware County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232072725
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Media, PA, USA
Phone
6106272292
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Victims' Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$216,396
Expenses
$218,149
Assets
$113,526
Liabilities
$137

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS KELLY (PRESIDENT)
  • DIANE PETERS (SECRETARY/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANE PETERS (SECRETARY/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $75,258 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Senior victim services, as a private non profit organization, serves victims of crime in Delaware county age 55 years and older. The organization provides advocacy, assistance and safety within the criminal justice system and with social service agencies and community organizations, in order to restore older person's lives and prevent further victimization.the vision of svs is to be a visible organization advocating for the rights and services for older victims of crime in Delaware county, providing comprehensive and coordinated services, both on the individual and systemic levels, maximizing community resources through collaborative relationships to support and promote opportunities for justice, rebuild lives, and ensure that older victims of crime are treated with dignity and respect.

What it reported doing in 2013

To provide victim assistance services to older victims and potential crime victims in Delaware county, pa.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $183K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • 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.

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

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.