Organization of Ancillary Services Suny Oneonta

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
150589897
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oneonta, NY, USA
Phone
6074363352
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Services, Organizations of Students

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,757,876
Expenses
$4,834,969
Assets
$14,825,313
Liabilities
$3,489,892

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alec Hodge (Vice President)
  • Oscar Oberkircher (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Diane M Williams (Outgo Exec Dir): $223,247 total reported compensation
  • Darrin Lyons (Manager/Exec dir): $191,761 total reported compensation
  • Susan Obergefell (Controller): $149,422 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Support SUNY Oneonta by operating, managing, enhancing and promoting programs and auxiliary services such as campus dining, bookstore, logo merchandise sales, outdoor educational and recreational facility, ID and dining card services, vending, washers and dryers and program account funding.

What it reported doing in 2024

The College Camp educational and recreational facility is heavily utilized. There were over 8,000 students, faculty, staff (and a few guests) who were involved in reservations at the Lodge. All services are provided free to students, with a slight charge for non-college activities scheduled by members of the campus community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 68% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68.5%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 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: 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: 16%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.07; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.7%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $223K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.