Illinois Public Employer Labor Relations Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362996101
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Rosemont, IL, USA
Phone
8473787700
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$319,112
Expenses
$303,871
Assets
$204,271
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAMEIKA JONES (PRESIDENT)
  • JENNIFER MCMAHON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • EMILY TAUB (ASST. VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ROBB B CRADDOCK (BOARD MEMBER)
  • KATIE GOLBACH (BOARD MEMBER)
  • SHARON TANNER (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Illinois public employer labor relations association is formed to provide the highest standard of excellence in assisting and representing all public sector employers in the area of labor and employee relations.

What it reported doing in 2025

The collective bargaining simulation is an intense, 3-day training program that ipelra conducts every two years. Each participant is assigned a role on a bargaining team (either management or union) and given background information regarding the parties involved in negotiations. Each bargaining group is assigned a facilitator (who is an experienced negotiator) to help guide them through the bargaining sessions. Training workshops are also presented throughout the exercise adn the trainer, an attorney, is also available to assist the teams as they progress through the various stages of bargaining.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.8%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.9% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $252K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.