Pittsburgh United

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208534071
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4122318648
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,338,813
Expenses
$3,824,989
Assets
$7,009,928
Liabilities
$632,166

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALEX WALLACH HANSON (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALEX WALLACH HANSON (Executive Director): $100,654 total reported compensation
  • CARL REDWOOD (CoChair): $16,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O

What it reported doing in 2025

Pittsburgh Uniteds coalition work & progressive issue campaigns have built stronger communities & more power for working class people in Pittsburgh & throughout Western Pennsylvania. Together, we fought water privatization, worked to preserve & expand affordable housing options in our communities, pushed corporations to take the high road and create good jobs & honor their workers rights to organize & we struggled with developers to invest in the things our community needs most. Despite the challenges of COVID-19, we have devoted our work to creating a sustainable movement of poor & working class people and partner organizations by working together to address the most pressing issues facing our community & lifting up & valuing people over profit.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.3%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $41.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 28.4%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.83; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.3% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $105K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.