The Institute for Pan African Cultural Education Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273912404
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Roxbury, MA, USA
Phone
8572693363
Rating
96
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Reported finances

Revenue
$135,575
Expenses
$128,301
Assets
$28,662
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Glenola Mitchel (Board Chair)
  • Kubrat Ogunleye (Board Member)
  • Claudia Smith-Reid (Board Director)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nonprofit organization which teaches cultural education and arts both after school and in summer. We offer enrichment activities as well homework support and field trips for school age students. We also organize community events such as Black history month celebrations and youth achievement awards dinner for the community. We work closely with the school district and other community organizations. We charge a small program fee to help pay for staffing and programming.

What it reported doing in 2019

P.A.C.E. received $27000 in grants for 2019. We were recognized for providing cultural activities and enrichment for children living in at risk communities in Boston. The funds received were from three philanthropic organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.6%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

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: 5.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.22; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $128K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.