Union Community Care

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231909490
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lancaster, PA, US
Phone
(717) 299-6371
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$65,856,094
Expenses
$58,628,901
Assets
$49,139,757
Liabilities
$19,557,897

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALISA JONES (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALISA JONES (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $355,501 total reported compensation
  • ANNE-MARIE DERRICO (CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER): $308,586 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW WEITZEL (MEDICAL PROVIDER): $271,101 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At Union Community Care, our mission is to spark equity through patient-led healthcare

What it reported doing in 2024

Union community care is a safety-net provider of medical, pharmaceutical, dental, and behavioral health care and enabling services to mostly low-income and uninsured residents of rural lancaster, chester, berks and lebanon counties. As a federally qualified health center, union community care provides health services to assist every patient, regardless of their ability to pay. Union community care's service area is designated as a medical, dental, and behavioral health professional shortage area, with a high-poverty population. In cy 2024, union community care addressed that need by providing comprehensive, culturally competent, primary care services to 44,498 patients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% 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.
  • 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.9%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 11%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.4% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 73.9% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $48.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $356K · 25 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.