Partners in Contracting Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351604806
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Hammond, IN, USA
Phone
2197501200
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$291,705
Expenses
$267,248
Assets
$39,934
Liabilities
$208

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

People named in this filing

  • LEANN MCCRUM (DIRECTOR)
  • TERRA SAMUEL (DIRECTOR)
  • BRUCE MENSHY (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Assist in the government procurement process

What it reported doing in 2013

Picc exists to help Indiana businesses market their products and services to the federal, state and local governments. Procurement counselors identify contract opportunities and understand the contract process from start to finish. These services enhance Indiana's economy by adding government contract dollars to local business revenue. Established in 1984 through a cooperative agreement with the u.s. Department of defense, and funding from the state of Indiana, office of community and rural affairs, picc has helped hundreds of small businesses receive millions of dollars worth of government contracts. In the last 3 years alone, picc helped obtain contracts totaling over 200 million dollars.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.2%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 75.6%; rating input score 76
  • 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 8.4%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.15; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.2% of revenue deployed · 75.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $202K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.