Family Promise of Carbon County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270763520
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Nesquehoning, PA, USA
Phone
6103794757
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$391,311
Expenses
$397,240
Assets
$432,975
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RUTH-ANNE JOSEPH (PRESIDENT)
  • CATHY LAMM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CATHY LAMM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $68,674 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Services to homeless families

What it reported doing in 2025

Family Promise of Carbon County is the only provider of Emergency Shelter for children and families experiencing homelessness in Carbon County PA. FPCC provides shelter, meals and comprehensive assistance utilizing a collaborative approach that involves volunteers, community members and resources. In 2025 89 familes were served - of which 61 were children Additionally, 1279 individuals were served through diversionary / eviction case management programs. And, FPCC provided services to 627 individuals through the Emergency Rental Assistance Program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.5%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.5%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.3%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.5% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $354K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $69K · 7 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.