Unionville-Chadds Ford School District

Legal name: Unionville-chadds Ford School District Pto

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
233052741
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kennett Square, PA, USA
Phone
6103883807
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Parent/Teacher Group

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$120,059
Expenses
$125,708
Assets
$190,032
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KRISTEN YOUNG (UNIONVILLE HS - PRESIDENT)
  • MEGHAN DELUCA (PATTON - CO-PRESIDENT)
  • SANDRA YOUNG (PATTON - CO-PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY RIEGER (PATTON - CO VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY SHARP (PATTON - CO VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KRISTEN YOUNG (UNIONVILLE HS - PRESIDENT)
  • HOANG-Q NGUYEN (UNIONVILLE HS - TREASURER)
  • ANNA MARCOTTE (UNIONVILLE HS - SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The unionville-chadds ford school district pto consists of parent-teacher organizations at a number of the schools within the unionville-chadds ford school district to provide an opportunity for discussion of mutual concerns of parents and teachers, to foster communication within the school and community, and to provide services to the schools and students within the school district. In addition and in furtherance of its purposes, the organization acts in an advisory and coordinating capacity with the other parent teacher organizations of schools within the school district.

What it reported doing in 2024

Enrichment activities are carried out by the individual pto's at a number of the schools. These activities are generally conducted throughout the school year within the schools and community and are coordinated by parent volunteers in cooperation with school administration and staff. They include: after prom event, teacher appreciation events, enrichment grants (flexible seating, library furniture, school branding&signage, etc.); scholarship fundcommunity and rapport building social events for the students, provided in a safe and supervised environment; before and after school academic enrichment programs; alcohol and drug awareness programs; student assemblies to enhance and reinforce classroom curriculum; purchase or provision of equipment, supplies, books, and other materials to schools and classrooms in support of curriculum goals; community service projects and initiatives aimed at involving students, families, and teachers in charitable endeavors; and programs to enhance student awareness and appreciation of the arts, in support of curriculum goals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 79% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 59% for direct work, and 41% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.6%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.7%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.51; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $121K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.