Pennsylvania Psychiatric Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231548659
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Severna Park, MD, USA
Phone
8472644667
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$563,746
Expenses
$597,336
Assets
$783,039
Liabilities
$9,975

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAVITA K FISCHER MD DFAPA (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK MATTA DO DFAPA (PRESIDENT-EL)

People named in this filing

  • KAVITA K FISCHER MD DFAPA (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK MATTA DO DFAPA (PRESIDENT-EL)
  • INDRANIL CHAKRABARTI MD DFAPA (VICE PRESIDE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To fully represent Pennsylvania psychiatrists in advocating for their patients, and to assure access to psychiatric services of high quality, through activities in education, shaping of legislation and upholding ethical standards.

What it reported doing in 2025

Continuing medical education programs (cme) are offered both in-person and virtually to all members of the Pennsylvania psychiatric society at the district branch and chapter levels. During 2025, paps offered 12 monthly educational webinars, full-day patient safey & risk management conference, two statewide women's educational events, resident graduation events, an addiction symposium, a spring colloquium of scholars and spring educational symposium, resident poster events. A women's educational symposium, fireside chats, annual awards gala, resident educational events, and educational dinner meetings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 24 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.