Community Youth Development Institute (CYDI) High School

Legal name: Community Youth Development Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364060341
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, US
Phone
773.224.2273
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,203,873
Expenses
$3,642,513
Assets
$2,042,067
Liabilities
$2,103,500

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Aaron L Royster Jr (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Aaron L Royster Jr (Chief Executive Officer): $112,218 total reported compensation
  • Mable Royster (Board Chair): $38,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

CYDI exists to prepare students to be productive members of society.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community Youth Development Institute High School (CYDI) offers work based learning for all students and a unique opportunity to learn and earn money while enrolled at CYDI. Students have multiple opportunities to receive employment during the summer as well as academic year and training with curriculum job readiness. The program is designed to improve options for CYDI students, to better prepare them for college and career, and to provide work-based learning experiences to all our studentsThis program is a critical component of helping our youth access local career fields with relatively low barriers for entry and the opportunities to make money faster.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 70.5%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.7%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.03; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 80.2% of revenue deployed · 70.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $143K reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 44 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.