Philadelphia Shipyard Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232939646
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Eagleville, PA, USA
Phone
2154652363
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$360,721
Expenses
$300,986
Assets
$1,014,302
Liabilities
$260,456

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA M CHAMBERS (Executive Dir.): $125,664 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Psdc's primary exempt purpose is to lessen the burdens of government for two governmental organizations: commonwealth of pa commonwealth and city of philadelphia city

What it reported doing in 2025

Psdc successfully oversaw the contruction of a state of the art shipbuilding facility in the former philadelphia naval shipyard that is now producing commercial vessels at full capacity as well as working on government ships. It was also involved in the process of hiring and training shipyard workers, through its adminstration of public funds used for those purposes. More than 2,316 jobs at the revitalized shipyard. Were created through these efforts. Psdc lessens the burden of government by representing the interests of governmental entities in connection with transactions that contribute to the retention of shipbuilding jobs in the philadelphia region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 33.6%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 35.1%; rating input score 35
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.6%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.37; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.8%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -24.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 33.6% of revenue deployed · 35.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $106K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.