Stark County Community Action Agency

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341320658
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Canton, OH, USA
Phone
3304541676
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,961,565
Expenses
$13,005,095
Assets
$9,052,281
Liabilities
$3,758,164

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RODNEY REASONOVER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • RODNEY REASONOVER (CEO): $210,420 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS CHELINE (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $40,012 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote economic self-sufficiency among low-income families and individuals of stark county.

What it reported doing in 2024

The stark county community action agency administers a federally funded home weatherization assistance program. The program is a low-income residential energy efficiency program designed and focused on reducing low-income household energy usage and burdens. The program services include household energy audits, attic and sidewall insulation blower door guided air leakage reduction, heating system repair or replacement and health and safety testing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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.

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: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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 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: -0.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.3% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $11.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $210K · 17 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $951K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 37 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.