Chicago Shares

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363957300
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3125734494
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Emergency Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$62,457
Expenses
$73,845
Assets
$64,909
Liabilities
$14,706

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • King Poor (President)
  • Julie Stagliano (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • King Poor (President)
  • Julie Stagliano (Executive Director)
  • Ron Polaniecki (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Chicago Shares is a food and necessities voucher program. Vouchers are sold to individuals and those individuals provide vouchers to those in need. Merchants accept these vouchers in lieu of cash, and Chicago Shares then reimburses those merchants for the vouchers accepted by them. Grants are made periodically based on estimates of vouchers not redeemed.

What it reported doing in 2025

Payments to merchants that accept vouchers presented by those in need for food and necessities. Merchants accept vouchers in lieu of cash. Chicago Shares reimburses those merchants for the vouchers accepted.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.