Glen Mills Schools

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
236437695
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Concordville, PA, USA
Phone
6104598100
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Secondary, High School

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,776,571
Expenses
$12,401,191
Assets
$53,754,599
Liabilities
$8,785,042

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CARYOLYN SEAGRAVES (PRESIDENT)
  • CURTIS JOHNSON (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JACK RUANE (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DR CHRISTOPHER R SPRIGGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR CHRISTOPHER R SPRIGGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $227,263 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide troubled youth with new opportunities and a chance to succeed. Glen mills schools offers both a residential program and community-based programs. Our focus is on behavior, character, academics, athletics, and trade programs which provide our students with the confidence and competence to be successful in life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Founded in 1826 as the house of refuge, the glen mills schools has provided services for over one hundred and ninety years and is the oldest existing institution of its type in the united states. The glen mills schools, located in Delaware county, Pennsylvania, has been at its present location for over one hundred years. The schools contracts with various state and county agencies to serve primarily as a residential facility for delinquent young men between the ages of 14 to 18. The glen mills schools primarily provides residential services for male delinquent youth, including diagnostic, educational and transitional services our general objectives, the same for all youth committed to our care, promotes the acquisition of life skills which prepares them to lead self sufficient lives, whether their plan is reunification with parent/guardian(s) or independent living upon their discharge. As each youth accomplishes his goals and functions as a mature, responsible member of the glen mills community, his self definition changes as well. The impact upon his self-concept and self-esteem is the result of his exposure to our carefully controlled, supervised normative culture. Services provided to youth committed to our care include: -providing a stable, safe and secure nonthreatening environment which promotes and supports growth and achievement -providing superior nutrition and shelter -providing services that address physical, social, and behavioral needs, especially with regard to anger control, problem solving, conflict resolution, decision making, reinforcement of positive self-image, self-respect and empathy for others -programming that assures a youth's behavioral and competency development -programming that provides not only educational but career and technical training which helps in the development of marketable, entry level job skills -providing an equal opportunity and accessibility to leisure activities including participation in intramural and/or interscholastic athletic competition -promoting the development of soft skills such as punctuality, respect, interpersonal and communication skills, and organizational pride which is supported by talented, qualified and dedicated staff. During fiscal year ending 6/30/2025, the glen mills schools did not service any residential boys in its residential program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 86% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.3%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.33; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $227K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $555K reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.