Illinois Community Action Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371377670
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Springfield, IL, USA
Phone
2177890125
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,852
Expenses
$42,132
Assets
$909,762
Liabilities
$2,500

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROGER PAVEY (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

People named in this filing

  • RICHARD STUBBLEFIELD (CHAIR)
  • NICCOLE CLEMENTS (VICE CHAIR)
  • DWIGHT FORD (TREASURER)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide training and technical assistance to community action agencies so that they have the capacity to participate in affordable housing and economic development projects in communities throughout Illinois. Icadc strengthens communities by engaging community action agencies and community leaders in creating additional opportunities that foster better living conditions, create more jobs, and provide financial opportunities to further the mission of community action.

What it reported doing in 2025

Illinois community action development corporation (icadc) is a non-for-profit organization which was created to assist community action agencies in the development of low-income housing and administer and operate low-income programs. The corporation's purpose is the enhancement of the quality of life for low-income individuals and families in Illinois. In 2018, icadc completed a tax credit housing project that consists of 30 homes in hoopeston, il. This project was done through a partnership with nef. It is currently in the ihda compliance period. Icadc is the general nfp partner in the project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 58%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -204.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.59; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 58% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $24K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.