Society of St Vincent De Paul Council O

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910583891
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2067679975
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,100,731
Expenses
$12,370,038
Assets
$14,880,505
Liabilities
$2,301,154

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAULA HOLMES (PRESIDENT)
  • MIRYA ROACH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MIRYA ROACH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $208,911 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 main purpose of the society is to help support individuals and families in spiritual or financial need. The society helps with the clothing needs and other basic needs of anyone in impoverished circumstances. In addition, the society helps with the prevention of evictions, hunger, and utility shut off.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conferences work: this program helps support individuals and families with accompaniment or financial need. The society helps with clothing and other basic needs of anyone in impoverished circumstances. In addition, the society helps with the prevention of evictions, hunger, and utility shut off. This program involves personal visits to the person in need. Most of the resources are subsidized by the conferences fundraising efforts. The outreach volunteer neighborhood volunteer group provided assistance in cash valued at $2.1 million and in-kind of $580,000 - volunteers logged 16,000 home visits and helped over 35,000 individuals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -2.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.7% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $10.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.