Center for Neighborhood Technology
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 362967283
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2020
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 7732784800
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,253,881
- Expenses
- $5,841,013
- Assets
- $3,551,026
- Liabilities
- $1,506,618
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NINA IDEMUDIA (DIRECTOR AND CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- NINA IDEMUDIA (DIRECTOR AND CEO): $188,400 total reported compensation
- MIRIAM SAVAD (CHIEF STRATEGY AND PROGRAM OFFICER): $150,145 total reported compensation
- LUCIA GEGLIO (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $139,703 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Deliver innovative analysis and solutions that support community-based organizations and local governments to create neighborhoods that are equitable, sustainable, and resilient. Cnt works where urban form, the built environment, and infrastructure of our cities intersects with disparities by race and income.
What it reported doing in 2025
Just neighborhoods - we work with changemakers across sectors to push for and enable equitable investment and infrastructure to ensure the environmental, economic, and social resilience of vulnerable, disinvested, and gentrifying neighborhoods.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 16
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.4%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $28.5 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 86.3%; rating input score 86; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 22nd 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: -11.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.4% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $188K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $420K reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.