Special Equestrians Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232196098
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Warrington, PA, USA
Phone
2159181001
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Equestrian

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$958,146
Expenses
$648,643
Assets
$863,779
Liabilities
$16,759

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Janice Witt (Executive Dir.): $69,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Special Equestrians provides therapeutic riding programs to individuals with physical, mental, and emotional disabilities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Special Equestrians equine-assisted therapies and learning programs use the powerful healing properties of therapeutic riding and unmounted groundwork to help individuals with physical, cognitive, and emotional disabilities develop new skills and reach higher levels of functioning. SE is a Premier Accredited PATH (Professional Association of Therapeutic Horsemanship) International Center; our facility, staff, and programming meet all relevant PATH Intl. Certification standards. We are committed to serving anyone who can benefit from our services, regardless of their ability to pay. If families cannot afford to pay our low fees, they can apply for additional financial assistance. We provide scholarships for roughly 30 percent of our riders.We work successfully with riders who meet criteria for more than 60 different disabling diagnoses, including cerebral palsy, Down syndrome, brain injuries, and Autism Spectrum Disorders. In addition, we have group programs for children and youth at risk for school failure; children and young adults enrolled in Autism intensive support classrooms and day programs; women and girls recovering from domestic trauma and personal health challenges; seniors with age-related disabilities; children grieving the loss of a family member, and those affected by a relative living with cancer. Representing diverse ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds, 80 percent of our riders were 18 or younger.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.6%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 80.6%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th 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: NotApplicable
    • 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: 32.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.6% of revenue deployed · 80.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $523K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $69K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 55/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.