Homewood Chidren's Village
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 271885583
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Phone
- 4127277605
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,824,909
- Expenses
- $2,458,933
- Assets
- $740,467
- Liabilities
- $241,773
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR JOHN M WALLACE JR (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- KELLIE WARE ESQ (BOARD MEMBER)
- JASON JONES (BOARD MEMBER)
- BILL LUCAS (BOARD MEMBER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the homewood children's village is to improve the lives of the children in homewood Pennsylvania and to simultaneously reweave the fabric of the community in which they live.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advocacy programs support child and community health, as well as develop and monitor individualized action plans that help students achieve emotional, environmental, financial, intellectual, occupational, physical and social development. Our team plays a central role in connecting students and families to services and they also ensure that resources make their way to students. Youth are engaged in after school and/or summer programming that promotes college and workforce readiness and builds a strong foundation for post-secondary success. Our team also provides educational services to advance the learning of students in homewood. We work closely with specialized partner organizations to increase engagement and learning. Services such as tutoring, mentoring and advocacy are provided to ensure children succeed. The organziation also supports the research and evaluation of our core services to analyze the impact of our organization. This is done through program design, logic model support, data analysis and evaluation. The organization is data driven allowing for analyses to be used to enhance program design and development. In turn, this spurs continual improvement.
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 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $1,165.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th 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: 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: -34.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.