Veterans Assistance Commission of Cook County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237202999
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3124336012
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Military, Veterans' Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,401,991
Expenses
$2,408,279
Assets
$290,018
Liabilities
$86,372

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FRANK GUTIERREZ (PRESIDENT)
  • BILL BROWNE (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN DUTCH DEGROOT (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIZABETH D SOTO (SUPERINTENDENT): $150,874 total reported compensation
  • RAJEEV SAMUEL (MANAGER, FINANCE AND BUSINESS): $146,346 total reported compensation
  • PETER BANCAK (FINANCE DIRECTOR): $67,400 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Veterans helping veterans and their families that are currently experiencing financial hardships and are in need of emergency aid in the county of cook.

What it reported doing in 2024

The veterans assistance commission was established under the Illinois compiled statue: 330 il cs 45/0.01 (from ch. 23 par. 3080) also referred to as the vaccc - veterans assistance commission of cook county. The purpose of the vaccc is to promote the welfare of honorably discharged indigent veterans that served in the armed forces of the u.s. And their dependents that meet the qualifying intake process. Veterans helping veterans and their families that are currently experiencing financial hardships and are in need to emergency aid in the county of cook.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.1%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 35%; rating input score 35
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.1%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.1% of revenue deployed · 35% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $842K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $151K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.