American Academy Mcallister Institute of Funeral Services Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 132590811
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2127571190
- Rating
- 57
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Vocational, Technical Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,696,058
- Expenses
- $4,882,061
- Assets
- $11,223,423
- Liabilities
- $8,469,474
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN FRASER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- DONALD CYMBOR (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DONALD CYMBOR (PRESIDENT): $346,717 total reported compensation
- JOHN FRASER (VICE PRESIDENT): $233,477 total reported compensation
- JAWAY TSO (FINANCIAL SPECIALIST): $177,933 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of american academy mcallister institute of funeral services, inc. Is to educate students so that they may reach their full potential and achieve their goal to enter the funeral service profession. The institute is committed to creating a learning environment that supports educational excellence, endorses academic integrity and promotes steadfastness and ethical behavior in the funeral profession. As a leader in funeral service education for over 90 years, the institute provides for and supports the educational needs of the funeral industry.
What it reported doing in 2024
The institute consistently educates approximately 270 students per semester and typically enrolls more than 125 new students each year. The population density of the region the institute primarily serves, along with the severe staffing shortage in the profession, has increased the importance of the institute's role in funeral service education.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
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: 34
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 42.1%; rating input score 42
- Program expense ratio: 32.3%; rating input score 32
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -32.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.3; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.75; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 24.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 42.1% of revenue deployed · 32.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $347K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $219K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.