Chester County Suicide Prevention Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474775174
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Exton, PA, USA
Phone
4849477855
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$213,649
Expenses
$190,962
Assets
$144,248
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSIE FINK (PRESIDENT)
  • KATE SIOLEK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATE SIOLEK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $69,992 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 chester county suicide prevention (ccsp) task force's mission is decreased suicide through increased awareness and education in the community. Ccsp task force collaborates with community stakeholders to develop suicide prevention strategies and works to reduce the risk, stigma and occurrence of suicide in chester county, Pennsylvania.

What it reported doing in 2024

The overall goal of this project is to expand current efforts of suicide prevention in chester county to include a more comprehensive public health approach which will address lethal means and suicide prevention. This will be done through a combination of education, outreach, and collaboration around lethal means education and suicide prevention. This approach will include enhancement of existing evidence-based programming, implementation of new evidence-based programming, and outreach to targeted audiences in the county. The expected outcome of this project is an increase in education and awareness around lethal means and suicide to further prevent suicide and the impact suicide has on the community

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.7%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 71.3%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.6%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 32.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 47.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.7% of revenue deployed · 71.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $136K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $70K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.