Southwestern Ct Agency on Aging Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
060916407
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Bridgeport, CT, USA
Phone
2033339288
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,140,201
Expenses
$16,789,461
Assets
$9,231,179
Liabilities
$4,351,235

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIE ALLEN (PRESIDENT / CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARIE ALLEN (PRESIDENT / CEO): $210,064 total reported compensation
  • CYNTHIA MAJERSKY (DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY OPTIONS): $185,450 total reported compensation
  • MARY DONNELLY (DIRECTOR, CARE MANAGEMENT): $154,531 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Swcaa is the trusted source of advocacy, information, and access to care for older and vulnerable adults that provides resources to strengthen the regional aging network.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants: swcaa's annual request for proposals invites nonprofit agencies serving older adults to apply for older americans act (oaa) funding administered by swcaa. Every three years, a robust area plan is developed to include a needs assessment for older adults in southwestern Connecticut. The identified needs form the foundation for evaluating the applications for funding. Swcaa actively recruits and provides technical assistance to nonprofits to assist them in applying for funds through the oaa. The invitation to apply includes public notice in the newspaper, promotion on the website and facebook, and postcards sent to nonprofits, mass emails to organizations within swcaa's distribution list and the distribution lists of other member organizations such as the united way. Application materials are posted on the swcaa website along with other resources to guide the applicant. All applications received by deadline are reviewed by the grants manager for minimal requirements and compliance with state and federal regulations. Swcaa board of directors and advisory council evaluate applications using a standardized evaluation tool. Awards are made based on the existing level of funds, the anticipated ability of the applicant to meet the identified needs and the applicant's ability to comply with all requirements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.6%; rating input score 98; 28th 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: 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: 2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.47; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.9% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $15.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 25 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $694K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 35 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 30 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.