Community Design Collaborative of Philadelphia

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232835435
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2155879290
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$878,867
Expenses
$628,244
Assets
$307,610
Liabilities
$188,898

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TYA WINN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TYA WINN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $115,702 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Improve philadelphia area neighborhoods by providing pro bono preliminary architectural, planning and design assistance to community-based organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

The collaborative received a planning grant from the william penn foundation for infill philadelphia: sacred places/civic spaces to develop, implement and sharing new models for innovative use of underutilized sacred places. The related programs, projects and promotion provides a unique opportunity to integrate the design, religious, and development communities' voices, as well as the neighborhoods', into the current conversation about preservation and neighboorhood assets. The discussion focuses on the nexus between activating underutilized sacred spaces, providing neighborhood services, and stewarding civic spaces for place based public engagement.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% 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.
  • 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: 32
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 29.8%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 40.4%; rating input score 40
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.5%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.61; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.4%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 29.8% of revenue deployed · 40.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $254K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $116K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.