Collective Climb

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852073531
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
4349079174
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Delinquency Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$660,803
Expenses
$625,382
Assets
$624,177
Liabilities
$44,630

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mckayla Warwick (Executive Director)
  • Jessica Gooding (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Mckayla Warwick (Executive Director): $72,075 total reported compensation
  • Kwaku Owusu (Finance Director): $67,747 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To serve adolescents and their communities through Restorative Practices.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, Collective Climb worked with 35 unique participants through restorative justice diversion. 33/35 of those youth have had no further systems contact. We maintain an all-time success rate (no recidivism) of 90% since beginning in 2021 and ending in 2025. We spent the year redesigning our curriculum for both youth participants and survivors, designing a more standardized intervention that can be scaled as our team grows. This new curriculum averages 4 months and contains the following phases: Opening Ceremony, Building Community, Transferring Psychosocial Tools, Political Education, Repairing the Harm, and Closing Ceremony. We provided $8502.85 in emergency payments for rent, utilities, food, phone bills, beds, clothing, and medication support, and connected 3 youth to free therapy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

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: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.3%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 57.3%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: $38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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; 64th 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: 5.4%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.3% of revenue deployed · 57.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $358K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $72K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.