Agency for Community Empowerment of Nepa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231649434
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Scranton, PA, USA
Phone
5709636836
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,073,814
Expenses
$25,539,742
Assets
$11,094,161
Liabilities
$2,895,070

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JIM WANSACZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • WILLIAM E COCKERILL (President)
  • MARILYN VITALI (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JIM WANSACZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $156,424 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to empower people with the skills to become self-sufficient and enhance their lives through education, training, life-skills, and support services.child day care, energy conservation, crisis intervention, food and shelter services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Head start: the acenepa head start/early head start programs provide comprehensive services to families and children enrolled. These services include:1) health assessments including physical and dental, as well as heights, weights, vision, hearing, speech, and lead screenings on each child. Also medical plans and follow up services for children with health issues. 2) children are provided nutritious meals and menus are developed by a licensed nutritionist to meet cacfp guidelines. Nutrition assessments are also completed on each child and followed up by the nutrition consultant as needed.3) individualized educational plans for each child that are measured to assess progress in the early learning domains three times each year. Program curriculum for head start is the creative curriculum and early head start utilizes the parents as teachers curriculum. The early head start program also provides services to pregnant mothers to ensure proper and adequate pre-natal care is provided and future parents receive educational information from a licensed practical nurse to prepare them for the birth of their child.4) services for children who have been diagnosed with special needs ar coordinated with local leab.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 96% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 most voting board members are independent. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -6.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.6%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.1% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $23.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $447K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.