Chicago Development Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203295327
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3127444389
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,876,806
Expenses
$683,140
Assets
$8,121,607
Liabilities
$200,438

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM JEFFRIES (DIRECTOR, VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CIERE BOATRIGHT (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT)
  • TERRENCE JOHNSON THRU 11224 (VICE PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY-TREASURER)

Highest reported compensation

  • CIERE BOATRIGHT (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT): $207,660 total reported compensation
  • ANNETTE GUZMAN (DIRECTOR): $201,564 total reported compensation
  • JILL JAWORSKI (DIRECTOR): $195,036 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

This corporation is formed exclusively for the benefit of, and to assist in carrying out the economic development program and objectives of, the city of chicago and to promote the development, establishment or expansion of industries, community facilities and underserved-area retail among other things, by generating private investment capital through the new markets tax credit program that can be made available for investments in low income communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization promotes economic development in the city of chicago's low income communities by providing investment capital through the utilization of the new markets tax credit program for industrial business expansion/retention, community facility development, and adding retail in under-served areas. The organization has been awarded $571 million of federal new markets tax credit allocation and through 2024 has utilized $506 million of the allocation to in turn generate below-market loans. The organization has made all of these loans to businesses located in areas qualified as higher distress. These loans have resulted in the recipient businesses and organizations being able to preserve or create thousands of jobs at full operation. Supported projects will also provide vital education, healthcare, job training, and other community services each year at full operation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% 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.

The verdict

MIXED - Program spending has grown recently and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 22
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29.1%; rating input score 29
  • Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 11.1%; rating input score 11; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 63.6%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.89; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29.1% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $636K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $208K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $484K reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 28 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 29/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 11/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.