The Glasser Schoenbaum Human Services Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592707877
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Phone
9413654545
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,369,835
Expenses
$3,479,450
Assets
$14,025,027
Liabilities
$6,396

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GAIL WELCH (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLENE ALTENHIN (DIRECTOR): $109,120 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

With a mission to achieve better lives and livelihoods for all our neighbors, Caring Collective accomplishes this by breaking down barriers to make it easier for non-profits to operate; bringing changemakers together across organizations to collaborate; and being a trusted nonprofit voice and advocate. Our Vision: By working collectively, nonprofits can solve our community's urgent problems and unmet needs ensuring everyone can thrive. Our Tagline: Nonprofits for Stronger Communities

What it reported doing in 2024

Since 1990, our programs, services, and partnership have resulted inover $9 million in savings for our Campus agencies.By saving our campus agency partners operational dollars through rent abatement, no-additional-cost utilities, and free-of-charge maintenance and other services, they have more resources to help men, women, and children in need. On our Campus today, 16 diverse agencies serve over 36,500 clients through more than 80 total programs.The economic impact is profound, as the tenant partners budgets totaled over $25 million, helping to alleviate burdens on other major social welfare systems such as healthcare, the criminal justice system, and education.Dr. Glasser believed the quality of life of Sarasota rests upon the quality of life of its people.Our deep community partnerships and relationships have contributed to this. This includes our role as the sole Sarasota fiscal agent for Season of Sharing of the Community Foundation of Sarasota County and the Herald Tribune, and as a 2-1-1 community liaison.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.5%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.03; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.5% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $109K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.