Near West Side Partners Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472708769
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4149330640
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,678,067
Expenses
$2,028,770
Assets
$13,495,596
Liabilities
$2,091,547

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lindsey St Arnold Bell (Executive Director)
  • Joe Tesch (Vice President)
  • Nkem Iroegbu (Vice President)
  • Steven Brown (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lindsey St Arnold Bell (Executive Director): $136,907 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Revitalize and sustain the near west side as a thriving business and residential corridor through collaborative efforts to promote economic development, improved housing, unified neighborhood identity, branding, and greater safety for residents and businesses.

What it reported doing in 2025

NWSP has four primary focus areas related to economic and community development, including 1 Housing, 2 Commercial Corridor Development, 3 Safety, and 4 Community Health. Housing and Health have been a major driver of many programs and initiatives, including NWSPs work with Concordia 27, a comprehensive community center designed to provide great access to health and wellness programming and high-quality, affordable housing in the near west side. NWSP sees health and wellbeing, housing and commercial development as fundamental charateristics of a safe and thriving community.

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 84% 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

STRONG - 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: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 78.4%; rating input score 78; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 24th 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: -20.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.65; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 69.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $137K · 16 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $113K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.