Philadelphia Corporation for Aging

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231905649
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2157659000
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$97,543,411
Expenses
$87,328,641
Assets
$63,100,941
Liabilities
$19,057,060

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Najja Orr (President and CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Najja Orr (President and CEO): $380,095 total reported compensation
  • George DeRosa (Director, IT): $269,561 total reported compensation
  • Laura Weinbaum (COO): $250,578 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Pca's mission is to improve the quality of life for older philadelphians and people with disabilities and assist them in achieving their maximum level of health, independence, and productivity.

What it reported doing in 2024

Long-Term Care Services-PCA assessed more than 80,000 Philadelphians for services in FY25 to help them remain successful in their homes and communities. Nearly 10,000 reports of need for older adults at risk were filed during FY25. Through our OPTIONS Program and related services, PCA offered care management, home-delivered meals (more than 1.2 million), personal care and other services, and critical home repairs and modifications.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 72% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.6%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 89.8%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.5%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.6% of revenue deployed · 89.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $78.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $380K · 23 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $13.2M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.