CP Nassau
Legal name: United Cerebral Palsy Association of Nassau County Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 111723782
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Roosevelt, NY, USA
- Phone
- 516-378-2000
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Birth Defects and Genetic Diseases
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $46,110,280
- Expenses
- $44,748,379
- Assets
- $30,046,807
- Liabilities
- $16,923,787
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
40 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ED PROBST (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
- HON ANTHONY L PARGA (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JERRY POLLER (PRESIDENT)
- JOHN SEERY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KATHRYN WILSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
- MARY LOU ZIZZO (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT - AUXILIARY)
Highest reported compensation
- KAREN HITTLEMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $450,606 total reported compensation
- GORDON M SIESS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $391,471 total reported compensation
- LARRY JOSEPH DAVIES (DIRECTOR OF HR & IT): $363,437 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We provide quality services for children and adults with disabilities to move forward to reach their highest level of independence.
What it reported doing in 2024
Medical and therapeutic services - include primary care, medical examinations, physical, occupational, and speech therapies, psychiatric & psychological services, podiatry services, dental care, and other specialty services. Examinations, physical, occupational, and speech therapies, psychiatric & psychological services, podiatry services, dental care, and other specialty services.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 96% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- 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: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 3%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 86% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $39.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $451K · 40 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.