Palladia Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237089380
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2126336900
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,934,370
Expenses
$35,060,077
Assets
$12,909,216
Liabilities
$14,035,026

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DONNA COLONNA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONNA COLONNA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $437,890 total reported compensation
  • PERRY PERLMUTTER (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $354,897 total reported compensation
  • JUDITH JACKSON (CHIEF OF STAFF): $226,389 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Palladia is nationally recognized for its innovative service delivery in the fields of substance abuse, housing, homelessness, HIV/AIDS, mental illness, trauma, domestic violence, criminal justice services and family services. Palladia offers it's wide range of services along a continuum of care-from outreach, prevention and treatment through supportive, permanent housing. These services are designed to promote independence and responsible living. Palladia pursues its mission by working in partnership with government, communities, academic institutions and the private sector.

What it reported doing in 2017

Substance abuse services - to break the cycle of poverty and chemical dependence, palladia offers residential and outpatient treatment for individuals and families struggling with chemical dependence. These substance abuse services are provided through four residential service programs and three outpatient programs and serve more than 600 individuals daily. The residential services also provide supplemental education, vocational training and placement and family reunification. Palladia has also assumed a leadership role in developing programming for men and women with a co-occurrence of mental illness and substance abuse.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 87% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 53
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 7.6%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.09; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.7% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $33.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $438K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $462K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2009 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 69 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.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.