Pacprh Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237431829
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Glen Ellyn, IL, USA
Phone
6304694114
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,863
Expenses
$75,379
Assets
$233,175
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLARD MARTENS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • WELDON JOHNSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLARD MARTENS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $50,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

A. To support the current operators (lssi and helping hand organizations) of the facilities built in concert with pacprh, inc.'s help pertaining to their cerebral palsy disability services dedication.b. To raise funds and/or distribute funds to assist individuals with cerebral palsy or organizations assisting them.c. To improve the quality of life of developmentally disabled adults (with emphasis on the cerebral palsied) by providing high quality and transformational learning programs and technology services.d. To help address and meet the social needs of disabled adults (with emphasis on the cerebral palsied) by providing common meeting places and arranging speakers and/or social events where the individuals have an opportunity for social interaction with their peers.e. To expand and improve representation and advocacy on behalf of developmentally disabled adults in civil legal matters (including assistance with legal fees); improve awarness through various resources.

What it reported doing in 2023

To support the current operators (lssi and helping hand organizations) of the facilities built in concert with pacprh, inc.'s help pertaining to their cerebral palsy disability services dedication.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 40.7%; rating input score 41
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -664.3%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.09; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 66.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -21.5% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 40.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $31K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $50K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.