Adolescent Counseling Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510192551
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Redwood City, CA, USA
Phone
6504240852
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Residential Mental Health Treatment

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,035,170
Expenses
$2,010,092
Assets
$3,671,210
Liabilities
$539,635

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVE KOHN (PRESIDENT)
  • SHANA FARLEY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PHILIPPE REY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PHILIPPE REY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $177,145 total reported compensation
  • ERIN CARLSON-JONES (CLINICAL DIRECTOR): $169,112 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER M PAGANO (FOUNDATION AND CORPORATE GRANTS OFFICER): $103,480 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Adolescent counseling services ("acs or organization") is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization, incorporated in 1975 in the state of California. Acs addresses the emotional developmental needs of adolescents and their families in santa clara and neighboring counties.

What it reported doing in 2024

Adolescent substance abuse treatment: is an outpatient treatment program for adolescents. A client can move progressively through three program levels or enter the program at any level according to individual need. The services are available to preteens, teens and their families, including parents and siblings on a sliding scale basis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

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: 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: 8 of 8 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: 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: 1.2%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.83; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.