Park Hill Collective Impact

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823928863
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
7205800136
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$868,662
Expenses
$829,854
Assets
$171,187
Liabilities
$37,778

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • James Roy II (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • James Roy II (Executive Director): $112,339 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to ensure that every child in Park Hill is provided the support needed to thrive academically, socially, emotionally, and economically from birth through age 25.

What it reported doing in 2024

Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment (CDPHE) - Communities Organizing for Prevention (COFP): Denver Metro Community Impact (DMCI) serves as the backbone organization for two community coalitions in Northeast Denver, funded by the CDPHE's COFP grant. The coalitions, 'Steps to Success' in the Far Northeast and 'Park Hill Strong' in the Near Northeast, work to promote positive youth development and reduce youth substance abuse and violence. In 2024, the coalitions selected new priority areas, focusing on the risk factor of Economic Instability and the protective factor of Community Opportunities for Prosocial Involvement and Connection. To address these, DMCI began developing implementation plans for new systems-change strategies, including supporting affordable housing and addressing low employment. Following a significant organizational restructuring, DMCI entered a partnership with the non-profit FaithBridge to manage the community coalitions, ensuring the continuity of the work. Additionally, DMCI launched a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) focused on housing in Northeast Denver, assembling a workgroup of experts and community members to guide the effort and inform the redevelopment of three local sites owned by the Urban Land Conservancy. In partnership with the University of Colorado and CDPHE, this program also employed 13 Youth Associates for 493.85 collective hours, assisting with events, programming, and a youth-focused community engagement phone app.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.3% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $859K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.