Community Impact Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133386904
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2128541472
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,100,312
Expenses
$2,151,070
Assets
$4,825,718
Liabilities
$1,129,939

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD HARRILL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD HARRILL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $147,930 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o.community impact's mission is to advance the public good by engaging columbia university students in high-quality service, in partnership with community organizations that meets critical community needs, develops student leadership, connects service and learning, and fosters an environment of mutual respect in the neighborhoods surrounding the university.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule o.community impact (ci) serves 25,000 low-income residents annually in upper manhattan. Ci operates 27 different programs in three major areas:1) youth education including mentoring, tutoring and cultural programs for children. 2) emergency services including hunger relief, shelter, and advocacy services. 3) adult education and workforce development programs which include high school equivalency classes, english for speakers of other languages classes, tutoring, college readiness workshops, and job services. Ci ensures that they reach their target low-income population and respond to their essential needs by working with 100 community partners including public schools, community-based organizations, churches and family shelters. Ci fully embraces volunteerism throughout all their programs. Their volunteer corps consists of 500 volunteers, over 500 columbia university (cu) students, some cu faculty and administrators, and community members. Accomplishments: increased food quantity and quality through emergency programs, increased hse earners through states temporary waiver program, maintained strong tutor core though hybrid programming.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: -2.4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.24; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.9% of revenue deployed · 72.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $148K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.