Protege Project NFP
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 934090674
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Flossmoor, IL, USA
- Phone
- 7089917458
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Youth Development - Business
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $803,712
- Expenses
- $804,231
- Assets
- $133,567
- Liabilities
- $115,519
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- Tori Dorsey (Operations Manager): $42,185 total reported compensation
- Kewana Reese (Founder and ED): $33,675 total reported compensation
- Robert White (Community Engagement Coordinator): $5,112 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Empowering young entrepreneurs, creating a better future and bridge the wealth gap for minorities
What it reported doing in 2025
Through the Illinois Youth Investment Program IYIP, The Protege Project NFP provided workforce development and employment readiness services to youth and young adults. The program focused on preparing participants for sustainable employment through job readiness training, financial literacy, and hands on work experience. Our participants completed structured training that included resume building, interview preparation, workplace communication, and professionalism. In addition, youth were placed in subsidized work experiences with local partners. Number of individuals served were approximately 60 youth and young adults, ages 16 to 24. Services provided were job readiness training, financial literacy education, subsidized employment placements, and career coaching. Outcomes were 90 percent completed job readiness training, 75 percent successfully obtained employment or internship placements, 65 percent retained employment beyond the program period. The program increased participant economic stability and provided pathways to long term career opportunities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 95
- Accountability: 10
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.3%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: $164.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.86; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 147.7% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 150% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 129.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.3% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $804K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.