Lancaster Cleft Palate Clinic
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 231306888
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Lancaster, PA, USA
- Phone
- 7173943793
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Birth Defects and Genetic Diseases
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,563,451
- Expenses
- $3,723,761
- Assets
- $10,765,437
- Liabilities
- $406,241
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- ELIZABETH PRADA (EXECUTIVE DI): $286,965 total reported compensation
- ERICA FEDERER (GENERAL DENT): $162,891 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The lancaster cleft palate clinic (lcpc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the quality of life for infants, children, and adults through comprehensive coordinated team treatment of craniofacial conditions resulting from birth defects, trauma, and disease. World-wide, one in every 575 children is born with some type of cleft or craniofacial anomaly. At lcpc, there is a team treatment approach which includes surgical, dental, speech, audiology, and orthodontic services. All services are provided regardless of a patients ability to pay. Team treatment has been shown to deliver optimal results for patients with cleft lip and palate and other craniofacial anomalies. Today, the ever declining insurance reimbursement challenge combined with a notable increase in patients with no medical insurance requires lcpc to rely on philanthropic support to ensure the treatment, therapies and interventions are offered to all patients.
What it reported doing in 2024
Diseases, disorders and medical disciplines - provide treatment to individuals with cranio-facial conditions resulting from birth defects, trauma, and diseases. The clinic has a strong commitment in research and educational programs benefiting patients with cleft and cranial facial anamolies, speech and hearing impairments, and general dentistry and diagnosis for oral health.
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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.7%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $8.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.5%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.89; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.7% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $287K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 32/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.