Taskforce Prevention and Community Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
363733207
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2010
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
7734734100
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,331,734
Expenses
$2,232,742
Assets
$1,701,588
Liabilities
$57,629

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHRIS BALTHAZAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS BALTHAZAR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $155,000 total reported compensation
  • DEMARIO ADAMS (OUTREACH DIRECTOR): $105,983 total reported compensation
  • REYNA ORTIZ (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $100,417 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization is committed to improving the sexual health and well being of lgbt and youth of color in chicago by providing a safe space for fellowship, HIV-sti screening and education, and on-site referrals to medical , housing, and other social services. The organization is dedicated to making a deifference by working towards solutionsin partnership with the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization is committed to improving the sexual health and well being of lgbto and youth of color in chicago by providing a safe space for fellowship, HIV-sti screening and education, and on-site referrals to medical , housing, and other social services. The organization is dedicated to making a deifference by working towards solutions in partnership with the community.

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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.3%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 52.7%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: $21.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.3% of revenue deployed · 52.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.