Sisters of Charity Foundation of Canton

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341832697
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Canton, OH, USA
Phone
(330) 454-5800
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,323,462
Expenses
$4,246,911
Assets
$89,640,767
Liabilities
$999,007

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marisa Rohn (President)
  • Michael Gore (President and CEO SCHS)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa Rogers (Assistant Treasurer): $415,705 total reported compensation
  • Janice Murphy (Board member): $343,750 total reported compensation
  • Marisa Rohn (President): $288,630 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 Sisters of Charity Foundation of Canton supports and furthers the mission and ministry of the Sisters of Charity of St. Augustine. The Foundation’s principal components of ministry are health, education, and social services, with a focus on issues of social justice relating to the poor and underserved in the Spirit of Jesus Christ.

What it reported doing in 2024

CAF has a long-time commitment to improving early education and care in Stark County and beyond. Programs to improve the quality of young children's early learning experiences outside of the home as well as programs that focus on families as children's first teachers are supported. Along with leading local efforts in early childhood, CAF works across the state and country to affect policy changes and support system building for young children and families. The majority of CAF's early childhood funding is dedicated to supporting a local resource center, a kindergarten readiness program, professional development for teachers and family support programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 20th 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: 1.8%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.11; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $416K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 46 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 63 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.