Expanded Mental Health Services of Chicago Nfp

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
454963756
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7737540577
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mental Health Treatment F31 Psychiatric, Mental Health Hospital

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,805,730
Expenses
$2,181,997
Assets
$3,599,648
Liabilities
$430,141

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGELA SEDENO PHD (MEMBER AT LARGE): $165,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of emhs is to provide accessible, culturally informed, quality mental health care to community residents through the integration of clinical practice, education and evaluation, and the application of psychological insight to address community concerns, as informed by the community and in collaboration with local residents and partners.

What it reported doing in 2024

During fy2024-25, the kedzie center served 392 clients and collateral clients and provided mental health support, education, and consultation to 1264 community members. Over the fiscal year, the kedzie center provided 5221 clinical encounters and 1264 community encounters, and the losah center served 128 clients and collateral clients and provided 1143 clinical encounters and 1431 community encounters - totaling 9059 therapeutic encounters. In addition to clinical services, the center offered community healing circles, help the helper circles, a storytelling therapeutic program, mental health first aid, and school and community based mental health workshops. Emhs now serves 7 neighborhoods, including albany park, irving park, north park, sauganash, and now the logan square, avondale, and hermosa neighborhoods on chicago's northwest side.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.5%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 22.2%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.65; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.6%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.8% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.5% of revenue deployed · 94.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.