Providence St Mel School

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362977187
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7737224600
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,333,530
Expenses
$5,898,759
Assets
$128,524,345
Liabilities
$1,409,583

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEANETTE BUTALA (School President)
  • CRYSTAL WARD (Vice President, Student Service Administrator)
  • DANIEL WESSEL (Vice President, Academic Administrator)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEANETTE BUTALA (School President): $239,664 total reported compensation
  • PAUL J ADAMS III (School Executive Chairman): $236,649 total reported compensation
  • CRYSTAL WARD (Vice President, Student Service Administrator): $165,910 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providence st. Mel school is an independent, private school whose mission is to provide a high-quality, college preparatory education to students from preschool through grade 12. The school primarily targets students on chicago's west side.

What it reported doing in 2024

PROVIDENCE ST. MEL PROVIDED 177 DAYS OF INSTRUCTION TO 279 STUDENTS FROM PRESCHOOL THROUGH GRADE 12. 17 STUDENTS COMPLETED GRADE 12 AND ALL WERE ACCEPTED TO FOUR-YEAR COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES. Grants and scholarships were given to organizations and students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $26.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.2%; rating input score 91; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 36.8%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.79; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $240K · 28 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $101K reported
  • Consistency: 47 of 49 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.