Prevailing Community Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383505176
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Detroit, MI, USA
Phone
3132852030
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$276,638
Expenses
$194,025
Assets
$59,520
Liabilities
$1,141

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALICIA SKILLMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALICIA SKILLMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $6,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To build a self contained community on detroits westside.

What it reported doing in 2013

To provide summer youth employment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.5%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 62%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 33.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -98.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.5% of revenue deployed · 62% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $120K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2013
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.