Pocono Mountains United Way

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
240797026
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Stroudsburg, PA, USA
Phone
5705173953
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Federated Giving Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,951,359
Expenses
$2,746,931
Assets
$4,096,846
Liabilities
$635,012

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BEN MAY (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL TUKEVA (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • SARAH JACOBI (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL TUKEVA (PRESIDENT/CEO): $177,719 total reported compensation
  • SARAH JACOBI (VICE PRESIDENT): $115,943 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Pocono mountains united way's mission is to engage and mobilize resources to improve lives through accelerated community change.

What it reported doing in 2024

Our programs and services focus on education, financial mobility, and health, as provided through funding and support with our social service agency partners in monroe county, pa. In fiscal year 2024-2025: 110 households were served through our rental assistance programs, 130 households were served through eviction mediation or housing counseling, 4,912 individuals were assisted through poconoinfo, monroe county's information & referral helpline.see additional information on schedule o. 500 children attended the summer steamr program, 450 children received books through the dolly parton imagination library, 51 students participated in generation next, 4,039 screenings were conducted for children ages 0-5, 51 children and their families were served through the smile in-home mentoring program, 2,520 backpacks were distributed into the community, 143 participants participated in fire safety trainings

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 62% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, 20% for grants, and 1% for affiliated organizations.
  • 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 38th 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.9%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.49; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 16 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $182K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.