Lester a Drenk Behavioral Health Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
210692393
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Hainesport, NJ, USA
Phone
6092675656
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Treatment F31 Psychiatric, Mental Health Hospital

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$20,633,825
Expenses
$20,656,746
Assets
$8,207,051
Liabilities
$4,601,033

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HARRY MARMORSTEIN (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • A F M HAQUE (MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $284,676 total reported compensation
  • HATICE YILMAZ BURAKGAZIS (PSYCHIATRIST): $222,969 total reported compensation
  • HARRY MARMORSTEIN (PRESIDENT/CEO): $197,216 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide psychiatric and psychological social work services for the residents of New Jersey.

What it reported doing in 2013

Ambulatory care services, the supportive housing program, the twilight program, family crisis intervention unit, burlington county projects for assistance in transition from homelessness, gateway program, children's mobile repsonse and stabilization system, therapeutic foster care program, outpatient services, wraparound services, screening and crisis intervention program, crisis house, screening and crisis intervention program mobile outreach, intensive case management program, and mercer reunification services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 65% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -0.1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.6% of revenue deployed · 86.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $17.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $285K · 14 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $774K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.