9Th Street Youth & Community Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455187845
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Chester, PA, USA
Phone
6108763891
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Centers, Clubs

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,739
Expenses
$22,592
Assets
$260
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN MULLEN (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER ZAVAWSKI (PRESIDENT)
  • BARRON LACY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN MULLEN (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER ZAVAWSKI (PRESIDENT)
  • BARRON LACY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Svcs & programs for chester atrisk youth

What it reported doing in 2024

Environmental youth corps had sessions of training, tree trimming, trail cleanup, riverfront cleanup.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 19.2%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 18

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.9%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 38.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 19.2% of revenue deployed · 18.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.