PHMC Integrated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231729031
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2159852500
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,559,169
Expenses
$15,865,320
Assets
$10,538,125
Liabilities
$6,313,365

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL PEARSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD COHEN (BOARD MEMBER): $1,184,270 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL PEARSON (PRESIDENT): $1,071,587 total reported compensation
  • JILL SCHULSON (Board Member): $644,677 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Phmc integrated, a private, not-for-profit entity, is a provider of services to children and families with special needs in the city of philadelphia and surrounding counties. Phmc integrated provides a full continuum of services through a variety of programs at fairwold academy.

What it reported doing in 2024

The phmc integrated approved private school (aps) is a specialized education setting for emotionally disturbed, learning disabled students ages 5 through 21 who have had difficulty achieving in a traditional classroom setting. The aps, operating as fairwold academy, offers small class size and an array of specialized support services that enhance the learning experience and produce positive outcomes for students. Phmc integrated's aps is funded by the pa department of education and local school districts who refer students to the program. Phmc integrated's aps educated 200 students in fiscal year 2025. Phmc integrated's spirit program educates students ages 7 through 21 who have intellectual disabilities, developmental delays, emotional challenges behavioral difficulties and autism spectrum disorders. The spirit program is funded by local school districts who refer students to the program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 87.3%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 9.6%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.2% of revenue deployed · 87.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 9 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 25 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.