Pennsylvania Society of Public Accountants

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
236296959
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Camp Hill, PA, USA
Phone
8002703352
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$528,219
Expenses
$510,143
Assets
$786,834
Liabilities
$341,987

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

Leadership & pay

39 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BARBARA ANN SOLTYSIAK CPA (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW J PIERNOCK JR ATP (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • MICHELLE A YOUNG EA (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES F TICE EA (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHERRY L DEAGOSTINO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHERRY L DEAGOSTINO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $156,717 total reported compensation
  • JAMES F TICE EA (2ND VICE PRESIDENT): $15,441 total reported compensation
  • MARY LEW KEHM CPA (DIRECTOR): $13,462 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 pstap promotes and maintains high professional and ethical standards of accountants in public practice in Pennsylvania; develops and improves accountancy education; and protects the interests of the public and members of the pstap.

What it reported doing in 2024

State scholarship program: annually, the society awards two scholarships to Pennsylvania residents who demonstrate academic excellence. The membership makes voluntary contributions with the payment of their dues to support this program. The goal of this program is to attract the best and the brightest Pennsylvania students into the accounting profession, to encourage students from diverse fields to pursue an advanced education in accountancy, and to increase awareness about the opportunities provided by an accounting career path.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.3%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 62%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.54; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.3% of revenue deployed · 62% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 38 of 38 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $316K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $157K · 39 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.