Family Counseling Services of Cortland County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
160975006
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cortland, NY, USA
Phone
6077530234
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alcohol, Drug and Substance Abuse, Dependency Prevention and Treatment

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,251,915
Expenses
$12,464,074
Assets
$12,684,559
Liabilities
$1,608,871

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA HOESCHELE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MARYANN K JOHNSON (BOARD PRESIDENT)
  • DORI CHURCH (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA HOESCHELE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $208,387 total reported compensation
  • TRICIA REYNOLDS (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE): $155,011 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide individual and family behavioral health care services for cortland and madison county residents through family counseling, chemical dependence, mental health, and substance abuse prevention counseling programs.

What it reported doing in 2025

The prevention division offers prevention education and services to all members of the community, including youth, adults, families, professionals, and educators. Evidence-based mentoring programs and activities are offered for at-risk youth and their families to improve communication and parenting skills, reduce problem behaviors, and reduce the risk of substance abuse. In addition, the lgbtq resource center is located at the prevention offices and offers information, resources and social activities for members of the lgbtq community and allies.

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 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 16th 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -1.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.02; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $11.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $208K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.