Hattie Larlham Community Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341863723
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Mantua, OH, USA
Phone
3302742272
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Treatment F31 Psychiatric, Mental Health Hospital

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$12,870,854
Expenses
$11,932,328
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREGORY WHITEMAN-THRU 123118 (PRESIDENT)
  • STEPHEN COLECCHI (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN COLECCHI (CEO): $246,163 total reported compensation
  • GREG SNYDER (CFO): $162,334 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL WARNER (VP OF OPERATIONS): $108,875 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Because we believe life is sacred, hattie larlham enhances the quality of life for people with disabilities and their families through our commitment to comfort, joy and achievement.

What it reported doing in 2018

Serve the day habilitation/activity needs of 250 individuals at 8 locations with profound disabilities and medically fragile conditions. Physical, emotional and learning needs are addressed every day by the staff of hattie larlham community services. Constant companion are day programs for individuals with disabilities which provide new hope and excitement for them and help expand their possibilities and accomplishments. It is a unique alternative to traditional work or day programs for people with developmental disabilities. The program focuses on the mutually beneficial interaction between people with disabilities and various domestic animals such as cats, rabbits, birds and fish. These animals are used as teaching AIDS to encourage participants to nurture and learn about the animals in their care.in addition, crafts, adaptive equipment and uses of switch technology provide stimulation and exciting program activities that promote prevocational and vocational skills while providing a long term basis for self mprovement on a daily basis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.5%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 7.3%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $11.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $246K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.