Brook Lane Behavioral Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830891593
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hagerstown, MD, USA
Phone
3017330330
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,552,398
Expenses
$18,967,984
Assets
$4,906,524
Liabilities
$6,054,595

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAULIK JOSHI DR PH (PRESIDENT/CEO - MH (AS OF 7/2024))
  • JEFF O'NEAL (PRESIDENT/CEO - BROOK LANE)

Highest reported compensation

  • MAULIK JOSHI DR PH (PRESIDENT/CEO - MH (AS OF 7/2024)): $1,662,052 total reported compensation
  • JOSHUA REPAC (CFO/TREASURER (AS OF 7/2024)): $566,310 total reported compensation
  • JAMAL FAWAZ (PSYCHIATRIST): $514,304 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Brook lane's mission is to help individuals improve their emotional and behavioral well-being through education and treatment.

What it reported doing in 2024

The high acuity residential crisis program is a unit designed to establish and operate a seven-bed high intensity, crisis stabilization program for youths between the ages of 8 and 17 in a behavioral or mental health crisis, who require intensive services for stabilization following a hospitalization, and are at risk of admission, but who can be appropriately served in a setting less intensive than a hospital. Youth are referred from the state and then reviewed, and accepted by brook lane. This unit is located on brook lane's main campus in hagerstown, md.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% 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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.23; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $17.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.7M · 27 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.