Partners in Community Building Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371442688
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123280873
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$483,264
Expenses
$411,672
Assets
$282,473
Liabilities
$27,752

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DORRI MCWHORTER (PRESIDENT)
  • ALEXANDRIA CUMMINGS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • BOBBI BALL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - TERM)

Highest reported compensation

  • BOBBI BALL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - TERM): $74,373 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To foster safe, sanitary and affordable housing for low to moderate income individuals, families, seniors and veterans as well as to provide the community with financial, educational and human services information.

What it reported doing in 2019

Financial education - picb partnered with a variety of financial institutions and community organizations to create a curriculum and action plan that is practical and attainable. Workshops include basic economic principles, cash flow & asset creation, establishing financial priorities and goals, the role of financial institutions, credit & debt management, and more. Clients in need of credit building work with counselors to review their credit reports and develop plans to correct derogatory credit through our access to financial tools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.6%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 61.8%; rating input score 62
  • 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: 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: 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: 14.8%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.1%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.6% of revenue deployed · 61.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $254K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $74K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2019
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.