Handson Twin Cities
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 410694710
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Saint Paul, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6123794900
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,913,050
- Expenses
- $1,796,539
- Assets
- $1,491,167
- Liabilities
- $582,267
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TRACY NIELSEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- TRACY NIELSEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $160,358 total reported compensation
- SHEILA HER DIRECTOR OF (OPERATIONS & SIGNATURE EVENTS): $113,197 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To inspire, equip, and mobilize a movement of people to make a positive difference through community engagement and service.
What it reported doing in 2025
Volunteer mobilization: for more than 107 years, handson twin cities (hotc) has advanced its mission of insipiring, equipping, and mobilizing people to take action that strengthens communities through volunteerism, civic engagement, and service.hotc serves as a centralized community resource that connects individuals, corporations, and community groups with meaningful volunteer opportunities that address critical community needs. Through our volunteer opportunity database, 28,296 users accessed resources and connections to service opportunities across 790 active nonprofit organizations in 2025.in 2025, handson twin cities facilitated flexible, accessible, and high-impact volunteer experiences that enabled more than 12,000 corporate volunteers to contribute over 13,000 hours of service through 213 community engagement projects. These projects supported local nonprofits, schools, and community organizations while resulting in the distribution of more than 70,000 essential kits and resources to individuals and families in need.volunteer engagement formats included:- onsite community volunteer projects - offsite corporate and community service projects - group projects-in-a-box - flexible individual and at-home volunteer engagement opportunities hotc continued to expand community access to volunteerism through:- free referral services that connect individuals with volunteer opportunities through online, email, phone, and in-person support. - educational resources, trainings, and community conversations that help volunteers deepen their understanding of community needs, civic responsibility, and the impact of service. - community-wide engagement events and collaborative initiatives that promote social connection, civic participation, and community belonging. - tools, resources, and technical assistance that help nonprofit organizations more effectively recruit, engage, and retain volunteers in support of their missions. Handson twin cities also provided capacity-building support to a network of 90 nonprofit member organizations, including 15 new members in 2025. Through quarterly peer learning events, educational content, and resource sharing, hotc helped community partners strengthen volunteer engagement practices, increase organizational capacity, and build stronger connections across the nonprofit sector.as community needs and workplace expectations continue to evolve, hotc remains a trusted community partner and thought leader in volunteer engagement, helping corporations, nonprofits, and community members develop more meaningful and impactful approaches to service.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 86% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 38
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 64th 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: 6.1%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 23 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.