The Arc Alliance Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 311592548
IRS 990 coverage: 2011–2024
Forms available: Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location: Eagleville, PA, USA
Phone: 6102654700
Rating: 81
Verdict: STRONG
Rating confidence: Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $310,887
Expenses: $663,568
Assets: $295,873
Liabilities: $41,052

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

PATRICIA LEO (CEO)
NIKKI KRELOVICH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

PATRICIA LEO (CEO): $164,186 total reported compensation
MICHAEL KUDLA (CFO & TREASURER): $120,402 total reported compensation
JESSICA WAGAMAN (COO): $104,941 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To work to generate private and public funding for the arc alliance children's services, the arc alliance advocacy services, and the arc alliance guardianship services to improve and expand their services, and support the individuals and families in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation is committed to securing resources necessary to generate the support and services that are needed by persons with developmental disabilities so that they can determine where and how they will live, work and play. Through its dedicated efforts, the foundation seeks to ensure that the goals of the arc alliance children's services, the arc alliance advocacy services and the arc alliance guardianship services are attainable, beyond public contracts with governmental agencies. If adequate support for the arc alliance children's services, the arc alliance advocacy services and the arc alliance guardianship services is achieved, the foundation will continue its development of resources to support other organizations that share its vision.

Operating model

Revenue model: Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model: Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 75% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 89
Transparency & Controls: 68
Accountability: 100
Sustainability: 14
Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
Foreign activity oversight: Limited
Grant itemization coverage: 99.2%; rating input score 99; 59th 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: 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: -113.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $664K in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
Related organizations: 7 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.