York County Cerebral Palsy Home Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 232037566
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- York, PA, USA
- Phone
- 7177676463
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Residential Care & Adult Day Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,483,146
- Expenses
- $17,132,940
- Assets
- $13,859,012
- Liabilities
- $1,545,995
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MEAGAN K ALAN (CHAIRMAN/PRESIDENT)
- JOSEPH J LUBAS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (N)
Highest reported compensation
- JOSEPH J LUBAS (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER (N): $223,511 total reported compensation
- PRISCILLA MENSAH (REGISTERED NURSE): $184,753 total reported compensation
- TIFFANY MCMEANS (REGISTERED NURSE): $176,657 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The margaret e. Moul home provides medical and nursing care as well as rehabilitation services for adults with neuromuscular impairment and cognition levels sufficient to benefit from specialized services. The environment is designed to enable the individuals to attain their desired maximum level of function and independence. These services will be provided by well-trained, caring staff and volunteers. The home provides services to individuals who primarily reside in york and surrounding counties of Pennsylvania, regardless of their ability to pay, to the extent of the home's ability to obtain funding from available sources.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provide housing and professional medical care to the severely handicapped, regardless of the ability to pay for the services provided. The home provided 29,784 days of services to the residents.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 95% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 91.5%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- 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: 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3.9%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 91.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $224K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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.
- 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 24/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.