Pennsylvania Economy League Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 231352264
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, USA
- Phone
- 2672093974
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,923,382
- Expenses
- $4,921,883
- Assets
- $1,841,306
- Liabilities
- $1,712,838
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JEFF HORNSTEIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- KENYATTA JAMES (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JEFF HORNSTEIN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $204,607 total reported compensation
- KENYATTA JAMES (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $117,784 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Pennsylvania economy league (pel) is an independent non-profit public policy research and development organization comprised of three limited liability companies: pel, southeastern pa, llc, dba economy league of greater philadelphia; see schedule o for continuationthe Pennsylvania economy league of southwestern pa, llc, dba the Pennsylvania economy league of greater pittsburgh; and the Pennsylvania economy league, central pa, llc. Pel's mission is to provide independent research on emerging issues in order to stimulate public and private action and to make Pennsylvania a better place to live, work and do business. Its purpose is to create a knowledgeable corporate and civic audience to help ensure the economic competitiveness of the commonwealth and its regions.
What it reported doing in 2024
2024 marked a year of transition and continued impact for the Pennsylvania economy league, central pa, llc.see schedule o for continuationfocus on local government financial distressthroughout 2024, the persistent issue of local government financial distress remained at the heart of pel's research, civic education, and project agenda. Ongoing economic challenges and global uncertainties reinforced the need for robust strategies to address this crisis. Pel continued providing municipalities across the commonwealth with technical assistance, building on its established expertise.home rule charter projectssignificant strides were made in supporting government study commissions, with the purpose of adopting home rule charters: borough of wilkinsburg: after residents voted to establish a government study commission in november 2022, pel was retained as a consultant in may 2023. By august, the commission unanimously voted to draft a home rule charter. City of lancaster: following a may 2023 vote to form a government study commission, pel was hired in june. Work continued into 2024 as the commission explored potential reforms. City of shamokin: after two previous attempts to form a government study commission, the city of shamokin elected commissioners in april 2024. Pel was retained as a consultant to assist with this work. Luzerne county: luzerne county residents voted to reexamine its home rule charter. Pel was retained as the consultant to support these efforts. These projects signify a shift in pel's technical assistance work, moving from merely assessing economic landscapes to recommending structural changes in public administration for long-term municipal sustainability.additional technical assistancebeyond the home rule projects, pel's technical support extended to a range of other initiatives: a collaboration with eckert seamans for an assessment of hannover area fire and rescue, finalized in august 2023, evaluating financial sustainability and administrative operations for the regional fire department of hanover borough and penn township. As one of the few paid borough and township fire departments in Pennsylvania, pel's assessment provided support of previous recommendations from the Pennsylvania department of community and economic development (dced), and recommended best practices for future sustainability and success. Post-act 47 assistance for the city of scranton, act-47 support for the city of shamokin, and support in exiting act 47 for the city of hazleton and the borough of mahanoy city. Strategic management planning program support for the municipalities of jefferson county, and the boroughs of dunmore, coudersport, luzerne, and catasauqua. A financial health assessment, a new dced initiative, for the borough of starrucca.civic education and policy engagementin 2024, pel expanded its civic education efforts. Regional committees were continued in york, reading (berk county), and scranton/wilkes-barre (nepa). Pel also hosted an in-person issues forum on home rule in york, featuring dr. Brian adams (chair of lancaster's government study commission) and york mayor michael helfrich, on the policy front, pel remained actively engaged in state-level discussions: provided testimony on multiple occasions to the Pennsylvania house local government committee. Presented on the home rule process and intricacies to community organizations, including better york and the hourglass foundation. Providing testimony on school district mergers before the basic education funding commission. Continued presenting on its not 1965 anymore at the Pennsylvania business privilege and mercantile tax collectors association annual conference. Presented on pel's work related to the hermitage-wheatland merger to the government finance officers association of Pennsylvania.outreach and communicationpel's weekly newsletters kept subscribers informed about key projects and public policy topics. The growing subscriber base and above-average click-throu
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 62
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 94
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 64.3%; rating input score 64
- Program expense ratio: 64.2%; rating input score 64
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 44.8%; rating input score 45; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 20th 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: 0%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 64.3% of revenue deployed · 64.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $205K · 10 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.