Advocates for the Disabled

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201706669
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Mount Kisco, NY, USA
Phone
9142449688
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health, General and Financing

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,464
Expenses
$137,039
Assets
$536
Liabilities
$535

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENYELE URCIUOLI (CEO)
  • SARAH FISKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CLCGS)
  • AMY BERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMY BERMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $173,097 total reported compensation
  • SARAH FISKE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CLCGS): $159,111 total reported compensation
  • DENYELE URCIUOLI (CEO): $65,901 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's primary function is to provide administrative services to organizations that provide artistic, recreational and vocational programs for developmentally disabled adults and the developmentally disabled adults who might benefit from such programs.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization formerly administered day hab programs for developmentally disabled adults. In 2024 the organization stopped providing these program services and in 2025 the majority of its remaining assets were transferred to a related organization to support its programs.

Operating model

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

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68.3%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -3,856.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $94K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.