Center for Economic Inclusion

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823563111
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Saint Paul, MN, USA
Phone
6123518200
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,329,571
Expenses
$6,465,591
Assets
$7,738,892
Liabilities
$1,002,053

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tawanna Black (Founder and Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tawanna Black (Founder and Chief Executive Officer): $391,215 total reported compensation
  • Suzanne Kelly (Chief of Staff): $217,995 total reported compensation
  • Anthony Tolliver (Sr Director of Workforce Innovation): $191,999 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Center for Economic Inclusion is an organization committed to strengthening the Minneapolis - Saint Paul region's civic infrastructure and collective capacity to disrupt systems and influence market forces to catalyze shared prosperity and advance an inclusive economy.

What it reported doing in 2022

Education, Coaching and Awareness: We curate experiential learning events, trainings, and workshops designed to raise awareness, foster shared accountability, drive action, and build ambassadors for action. Our campaigns inform, equip and inspire employers and policymakers, for example, to invest in regional workforce development to: * Build racially inclusive, equitable and engaging workplaces * Leverage inclusive workplaces to increase productivity and market growth * Drive public policy change through lobbying and regional advocacy * Facilitate cross-racial, multi-sector partnerships for increased awareness, action, and accountability * Elevate the economic imperative of closing racial wealth gaps by investing in Black, Indigenous, Latinx, and Asian individuals, businesses, and communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 62% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68.5%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $31.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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; 64th 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: Fail
    • 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: -49.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.2% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $391K · 18 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.