St John's Community Services
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 530196554
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2022376500
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,829,034
- Expenses
- $10,977,851
- Assets
- $6,256,534
- Liabilities
- $12,229,011
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GORDON A THORNTON (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- GEORGE LIACOPOULOS (DEPUTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- GORDON A THORNTON (PRESIDENT & CEO): $460,377 total reported compensation
- GEORGE LIACOPOULOS (DEPUTY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $309,696 total reported compensation
- SHERRIE HARRISON-RUMBLE (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE (UNTIL 7/28/25)): $250,635 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 mission of st. John's community services is to advance inclusive communities where every person, regardless of circumstances, has the right and opportunity to live their best life.
What it reported doing in 2024
St. John's community services (sjcs) is a historic (founded in 1868) non-profit corporation initially established as a hospital in Washington, dc, by st. John's episcopal church, the "church of the presidents," following the civil war. Today it is a private, non-sectarian, non-profit corporation that operates as a "parent" corporation for a group of independent subsidiary corporations. These subsidiary corporations contract with st. John's community services for the use of the copyrighted name as well as for several administrative support services. The parent corporation is governed by a volunteer board of trustees (bot). The bot has fiduciary responsibility for the organization, and provides overall guidance, oversight and direction to the subsidiary corporations. - continue on schedule o.the subsidiary corporations are local entities with representation on the board of trustees and are led by local staff leadership. This affords local perspectives and diversity in addressing the unique needs of local communities within the respective states. As a prerequisite for establishing a contract with the parent corporation, each subsidiary agrees to operate within service quality standards that the parent corporation has established. In fiscal year 2024, state subsidiary locations included: the district of columbia, Tennessee, and Virginia. Operations in Delaware and New York were provided under the auspices of the parent organization. Sjcs provides administrative and technical assistance to its subsidiaries and other state operations for the provision of services which include: employment, community participation, and community living, including shelter and housing for people experiencing homelessness. The parent corporation also periodically provides external technical assistance and training to other non-profit and for-profit organizations, as well as government agencies. The organization contributes a portion of its resources to each of its five state operations to support the st. John's community services mission. People receiving services through a st. John's subsidiary or other state operations must meet the eligibility requirements of local funding sources and the respective state subsidiary for each specific service.the administrative support services that the parent corporation provides include: accounting, cash management, strategic planning, communications and information dissemination, human resources, information technology, quality assurance, corporate compliance, marketing, fundraising, and program development. These support services are individually tailored to meet the unique needs of each subsidiary corporation and state operation and its distinctive cultural as well as financial status. These services assist state operations to meet the requirements of the contracts, laws and regulations under which they operate. Each subsidiary operates under its own operating policies and procedures and local leadership. Administrative support services are provided to the subsidiary corporations at a low fixed rate consistent with national standards.to further the mission of advancing inclusive communities where every person, regardless of circumstances, has the right and opportunity to live their best life, the parent corporation sets quality standards consistent with the mission that must be met by the subsidiaries in the provision of services. Those services must foster inclusion, self-direction, economic self-sufficiency, relationship development and choice. Meeting and maintaining these standards is an essential requirement for the continuation of the administrative support contract and use of the corporate name.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 46
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 10
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 12.5%; rating input score 12
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: -500.2%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.95; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 25% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 12.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $460K · 22 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
- Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 12/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.