Partners in Community Supports
Legal name: Partners in Community Supports Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 411976959
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Saint Paul, MN, US
- Phone
- 651.967.5060
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Developmentally Disabled Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $100,110,294
- Expenses
- $93,579,604
- Assets
- $45,064,034
- Liabilities
- $1,964,301
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PATRICK THUESON (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- PATRICK THUESON (PRESIDENT): $495,183 total reported compensation
- TAUSEEF JOE KHAWAJA (SR. VP FINANCE AND OPERATIONS): $285,133 total reported compensation
- ALEXIS OBERDORFER (SR. VP SERVICE): $242,283 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
PICS (Partners in Community Supports) is a Financial Management Service (FMS) and licensed service provider that offers financial and technical support for individuals and families who self-direct care.
What it reported doing in 2024
Pics (partners in community supports) is a financial management services (fms) that offers financial and technical support for individuals and families who choose to design their own support structures and remain in their own homes and communities. Last year over 2,400 participants chose pics self-directed services and were supported by 3,300 workers/caregivers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.8%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 99.3%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.5%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 92.8% of revenue deployed · 99.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $92.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $495K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.