Center on Halsted

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510178807
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2023
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7734726469
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,458,987
Expenses
$8,277,020
Assets
$24,699,728
Liabilities
$4,513,104

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joli Robinson (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Joli Robinson (CEO): $290,842 total reported compensation
  • Jim Klein - Chief Technology (& Operations Officer): $159,140 total reported compensation
  • Brittany Terry (Sr Director of People and Culture): $125,163 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Center on Halsted advances community and secures the health and well-being of the LGBTQ people of Chicagoland.

What it reported doing in 2024

Culinary Arts Services: Center on Halsted has a strong history of job training, particularly since the opening of our current facility in 2007. Center on Halsted launched the Silver Fork Culinary Job Training Program in November 2010. This is the first professional culinary arts training at Center on Halsted designed specifically for underserved and at-risk adults. Silver Fork addresses short and long-term vocational needs, and ensures the successful outcomes of our community members while focusing on shortages within the Chicago employment market. Graduates of our Silver Fork program are trained and prepared to enter this growing workforce. In addition to cooking, the students take a Food Service Safety Management Certification course and those who pass have management level certification for Illinois and the City of Chicago. We also take the BASSET certification for serving alcohol in Illinois. We spend time writing resumes, role playing how to handle stressful situations, and offer job assistance. Additionally, we offer a mock interview workshop with industry professionals.

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 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.8%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 71.7%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.98; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.8% of revenue deployed · 71.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $5.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $291K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $530K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.