Mohawk Valley Handicapped Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161206078
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Utica, NY, USA
Phone
3157246907
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,509,650
Expenses
$2,916,928
Assets
$9,974,589
Liabilities
$6,288,196

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTHONY SPIRIDIGLOIZZI (PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM HOLICKY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GENO DECONDO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • LOUIS B TEHAN (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LOUIS B TEHAN (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $367,448 total reported compensation
  • GENO DECONDO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $217,781 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mohawk valley handicapped services, inc. Is a non-profit organization that serves as a lease holder for facilities which house programs operated by upstate cerebral palsy, inc. The organization receives revenue through rental properties to upstate cerebral palsy, inc. Which are then used to maintain and enhance facilities as well as support capital initiatives of upstate cerebral palsy, inc.

What it reported doing in 2017

Rental of property: the organization holds title to properties and collect income from rents and interest. It services as a lease holder for facilities which house programs operated by upstate cerebral palsy, inc. The organization raises funds through rental properties, which are then used to maintain and enhance the facilities as well as support capital initiatives of upstate cerebral palsy, inc.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 96% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.2%; rating input score 97
  • 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; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Fail
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -93.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.42; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $367K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 8 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.