Rockford Area Pride Committee
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 933073282
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-PF 2024
- Location
- Rockford, IL, USA
- Rating
- 56
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Lesbian, Gay Rights
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $33,445
- Expenses
- $24,833
- Assets
- $25,558
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
People named in this filing
- Andrew J Mertzenich (Co-Chair)
- Darcy Pinasco (Chair)
- Andrew J Mertzenich (Interim Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization conducts fundraising activities to provide financial support to local nonprofits dedicated to assisting marginalized communities including the poor distressed and underprivileged. Additionally it focuses on combating prejudice and discrimination against LGBTQIA+ individuals in Rockford and surrounding areas. Through these efforts the organization strives to promote equality inclusivity and social justice within the community.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organizations fundraising efforts for the Rockford Area Pride Parade also benefited the LIAM Foundation through two key contributions. The first contribution was derived directly from the proceeds of the parade while the second involved sponsoring LIAMs annual gala fundraiser. These initiatives underscore the organizations commitment to supporting and collaborating with other nonprofits to amplify their impact in the community.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 27
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 57
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 24.1%; rating input score 24
- Program expense ratio: 32.5%; rating input score 32
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.7%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 24.1% of revenue deployed · 32.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 32/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.