Sojourner House Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
251737004
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4124417783
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Addictive Disorders N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,729,714
Expenses
$2,384,287
Assets
$2,981,314
Liabilities
$873,098

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAUREN E MARZULLO (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • NATASHA LIGHTNER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DE'NETTA BENJAMIN-MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DE'NETTA BENJAMIN-MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $155,414 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW LEWIS (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & OPER): $117,876 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Sheltering people in recovery and their children to confidently transition into the community

What it reported doing in 2024

Sojourner house is a long term residential style treatment program for mothers experiencing substance use disorders that allows their children to remain with them. We offer a holistic approach for treating substance use disorders while maintaining the family unit. Each family has an apartment provided with basic necessities. Mother's attend groups, individual therapy, parenting classes, and family oriented programs. The children are enrolled into school and address their basic needs including medical appointments, support for educational needs such as iep's, and activities based on curriculum from nurturing families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 74.8%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.7%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.25; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66% of revenue deployed · 74.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.