Sleighton School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231352527
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Elwyn, PA, USA
Phone
6108912000
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Inmate Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,050
Expenses
$1,010,568
Assets
$1,948,768
Liabilities
$20,491,303

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES S MCLISTER (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES S MCLISTER (PRESIDENT/CEO): $803,680 total reported compensation
  • LEONARD J KIRBY (SVP/COO): $464,803 total reported compensation
  • NIKOLE CABREY (SVP/CFO/TREASURER (AS OF 05/2025)): $405,912 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

This corporation is organized exclusively for the charitable benefit of elwyn of Pennsylvania and Delaware (formerly, "elwyn") within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code of 1986, as amended (the "code") as more specifically stated in its articles of incorporation.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization operated a residential program for girls until 2001. Its sole asset is the property on which the school operated. Subsequent to the discontinuation of the residential program, the organization has been in the process of marketing the property for sale. In june 2020, sleighton entered into a sales agreement with a private entity for the remaining 200 acres of the sleighton property. The anticipated sales price is approximately $17,285,255, with a minimum guaranteed price of $16,000,000, contingent upon the number of approved housing units. The agreement provides for a maximum environmental remediation credit of up to $3,000,000, based on the estimated costs of (i) demolition of existing buildings and (ii) remediation of environmental contamination on the property. The transaction is subject to customary real estate sale contingencies. Closing is contingent upon discretionary zoning amendments and approval of a joint land development plan by two municipalities. The timing and likelihood of these approvals remain uncertain. In addition, several land use litigation matters are pending in the Delaware county, Pennsylvania court of common pleas related to the municipal approvals required for the proposed development. The outcomes of these proceedings cannot be reasonably determined at this time.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - 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: 70
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 40

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: 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -96,144.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.93; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 10.52; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -37.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $804K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 17 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.