Pegasus Farm

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341472997
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Hartville, OH, USA
Phone
3309352300
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Equestrian

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,633,665
Expenses
$1,733,270
Assets
$3,252,553
Liabilities
$429,046

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAURA FRYAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHELLEY SPRANG (EXECUTIVE DI): $62,882 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of pegasus farm is to create a community that holistically supports and empowers people with diverse needs through therapeutic equestrian programs, vocational services, and recreational and social activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pegasus farm serves over 500 individuals with disabilities annually. Our program participants range in age from 3 years to 75 years, with the majority being between the ages of 4 and 20. These individuals may have emotional, behavioral, cognitive, developmental or physical disabilities or a combination of these conditions. Pegasus farm is dedicated to the idea that equine assisted activities provide exceptional physical and psychological benefits, challenging participants with disabilities to positively learn and grow in ways they may not experience in day-to-day life. The farm is one of four therapeutic equestrian centers in northeast Ohio that are certified as a premier center by the professional association of therapeutic horsemanship, international (path). We are currently serving individuals from eight different counties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.2%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.2% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $63K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.