Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 361263210
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 3129227474
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Behavioral Science
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,437,846
- Expenses
- $2,449,949
- Assets
- $2,800,821
- Liabilities
- $1,729,949
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAVID BROOKS (PRESIDENT)
- MADALYN WARREN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- DAVID BROOKS (PRESIDENT): $137,853 total reported compensation
- MADALYN WARREN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $81,591 total reported compensation
- MARSHALL KORDON (INSTITUTE DEAN): $31,155 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The chicago psychoanalytic institute transforms the lives of individuals, families and communities, using psychoanalytic knowledge to help them grow and thrive.
What it reported doing in 2024
Treatment centers:1. Adult clinical services offer reduced fee psychotherapy services through approximately 20 licensed psychotherapists and a group of experienced student fellows. Services include consultations and psychotherapy to adult individuals and couples seeking help for difficulties with anxiety, depression, relationship problems, and a wide variety of other concerns.2. Child grief services provide therapeutic services to bereaved children and their families; make intervention more accessible; heighten awareness of the potentiall harmful short-term and long-term
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 68% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 51
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 56.9%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 52.8%; rating input score 53
- Fundraising efficiency: $4.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: Fail
- 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: -0.5%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.14; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 56.9% of revenue deployed · 52.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $138K · 22 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $107K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.