Greater Berks Development Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 236392284
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Reading, PA, USA
- Phone
- 6103766766
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,767,392
- Expenses
- $3,785,563
- Assets
- $36,710,746
- Liabilities
- $17,464,178
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DEBRA L MILLMAN (PRESIDENT)
- LUCINE SIHELNIK (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- LUCINE SIHELNIK (CEO): $221,310 total reported compensation
- DEBRA L MILLMAN (PRESIDENT): $207,920 total reported compensation
- SARA STEWART (ASST TREASURER): $200,614 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The greater berks development fund AIDS and promotes economic and industrial expansion, and contributes to the economic well-being of reading and berks county by facilitating, promoting, and participating in, and financing economic development and community revitalization projects consistent with the needs of the community, with the intention of effectuating positive change in the economic opportunities available to residents and businesses by creating jobs and inducing private investment.
What it reported doing in 2025
The fund grants real estate and machinery & equipment-related loans and assists in other economic and industrial-type lending to aid and promote the economic and industrial expansion in reading & berks county.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 74% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 71
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 68.4%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 20.6%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.7; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 68.4% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 18 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $221K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $535K reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.