Society of St Vincent DePaul Cape & Islands District Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
352633631
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
East Dennis, MA, USA
Phone
7744143665
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$885,216
Expenses
$687,046
Assets
$1,101,412
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert Haws (President)
  • Al Alfano (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Robert Haws (President)
  • Robert Donahoe (Treasurer)
  • Carmella Alfano (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To coordinate the philanthropic activities of 12 local Society of St Vincent de Paul Conferences in the geographic area known as Cape Cod MA. Each Conference provides help and services in its own parish. The District Council oversees these activities in accordance with the National Society's rules.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operate food pantries within the parish area of the individual conferences to provide food, free of cost, to clients. These pantries serve a double purpose - not only do they feed the needy and their families but also give the needy family a special financial tool as every dollar the he/she does not need to spend on food is a dollar that he/she can use to pay for rent or utilities or other basic needs. The dollar expense for operating this program is very low as all of our food pantries are affiliated with the Greater Boston Food Bank GBFB - a recipient of the benefits from the USDA - and therefore can purchase food, including meats, for around 26 cents per pound. Food is also received weekly, free of charge, from large food chains operating in our area. Food pantries, not associated with the GBFB, are funded by product donations from their local parish members. Clients are urged to use our food pantries weekly. It is estimated that our food pantries were visited some 36,000 times during the current fiscal year and the value of the food distributed was in excess of $750,000. Our food pantries are operated by volunteers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 63
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.4%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.5% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 19 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $637K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.