Family Guidance Centers, Inc.

Legal name: Family Guidance Centers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362690275
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Glenview, IL, USA
Phone
+1 844-8FGCCARES (844-834-2227)
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$56,773,309
Expenses
$53,373,694
Assets
$44,932,368
Liabilities
$6,832,347

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LARRY KROLL PHD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • ALLISON ALEXANDER (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LARRY KROLL PHD (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $453,100 total reported compensation
  • RONALD VLASATY (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $391,447 total reported compensation
  • MARIA BRUNI (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $292,178 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Family Guidance Centers, Inc. (FGC), a not-for-profit behavioral healthcare organization, treats and prevents substance use disorder, as well as an array of other related conditions.

What it reported doing in 2024

Metropolitan preparatory school (mps) provides the surrounding public school districts with a private day school setting for students who experience limited success in traditional special education programs. The private day school program addresses the needs of students who have been identified by their respective school districts as emotional and/or behavioral disordered, learning disabled, or other form of health impairment under section 14-7.02 of the state of Illinois school code. Mps serves students in kindergarten through grade twelve, aged 5-21 years. Using a multidisciplinary approach, mps provides educational and therapeutic learning opportunities in a small, nurturing environment. All students are recommended to mps by surrounding school districts and receive educational services. Mps staff is comprised of state-certified special education teachers and paraprofessionals as well as state-licensed counselors and social workers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.7%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 16th 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: 6%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 15 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 70.7% of revenue deployed · 75.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $40.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $453K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $15.3M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.