Police Assessment Resource Center Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
134178074
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2136235757
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Libraries

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,684,774
Expenses
$1,836,203
Assets
$303,499
Liabilities
$342,585

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MERRICK BOBB (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MERRICK BOBB (PRESIDENT): $271,068 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW BARGE (EXECUTIVE DI): $270,238 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Police assessment resource center's mission is to strengthen effective and accountable policing

What it reported doing in 2017

Formed in 2001 by the vera institute of justice ("vera"), parc is dedicated to strengthening effective, respectful, and publicly accountable policing. Parc serves as an "honest broker", working in cooperation with law enforcement executives, civic and government officials, civilian oversight professionals, and other interested constituencies to improve police performance. To these ends, parc provides direct services to individual jurisdictions and serves as a national resource center specializing in the formulation and dissemination of model policies and procedures to manage and reduce the risk of police misconduct.parc employees currently serve as monitors to the federal court in connection to consent decrees in seattle, Washington; cleveland, Ohio; and chicago, Illinois. Parc provides staff and support to the monitors. Through its direct services, parc assists officals in individual jurisdictions as they develop and strengthen oversight systems. Parc conducts reviews of policies and practices, evaluates external and internal oversight mechanisms, collects and analyzes relevant data, performs accountability ausits and helps police leaders develop and implement management strategies that promote accountability. As a national resource center, parc performs research on issues of concern among law enforcement professionals and community members. They provide guidance regarding policing practices and oversight of the police. Parc maintains an informational website, sponsors forums on issues and trends in the field of policing, conducts and publishes independant research on emerging issues and enduring challenges, and catalogues model policies and procedures.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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 most voting board members are independent. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 11
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 9th 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: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.13; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $271K · 5 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.