Lincoln Hall

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
135562266
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lincolndale, NY, USA
Phone
9142487474
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,229,476
Expenses
$19,755,985
Assets
$6,682,238
Liabilities
$5,673,572

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDWARD G ANGELINI (VICE PRESIDENT & SECRETARY)
  • PAUL MEISSNER (PRESIDENT)
  • VINCENT MADERA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SEE SCH O))

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES COUGHLIN (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $161,331 total reported compensation
  • EDWARD SOFIA (SENIOR PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $133,649 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lincoln hall provides specialized services for adolescents which reflect the belief that disadvantaged youth have the potential to become responsible individuals with a sense of self-worth and respect for others. The organization, in partnership with families, forms a community that believes in the lasting effects of focused, caring treatment and education enabling the youth in its care to become successful members of society. During the reporting period the organization operated a shelter program for unaccompanied minors with a capacity of 100 beds, funded by the office of refugee resettlement (orr).

What it reported doing in 2024

Family reunification program - this program reunites minors with their families and provides health screenings, food, clothing, shelter, and education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 73%; rating input score 73
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

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: NotApplicable
    • 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: -8.4%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.85; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.2% of revenue deployed · 73% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $161K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.