The Pittsburgh Promise Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261982661
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4122817605
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,437,970
Expenses
$12,134,225
Assets
$55,895,243
Liabilities
$250,738

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

Leadership & pay

28 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SALEEM GHUBRIL (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELISABETH SCHROEDER (DIRECTOR): $720,300 total reported compensation
  • SALEEM GHUBRIL (PRESIDENT): $344,113 total reported compensation
  • AMY YEARWOOD (DIRECTOR, COLLEGE & CAREER SUCCESS): $135,183 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 pittsburgh promise promotes high educational aspirations among urban youth, funds scholarships for post-secondary access, and fuels a prepared and diverse regional workforce.

What it reported doing in 2024

The pittsburgh promise was launched in 2007 with a $100 million commitment by the university of pittsburgh medical center (upmc). Upmc's commitment included an initial $10 million contribution and the remaining $90 million was a challenge grant intended to spur a community-wide campaign to raise an additional $150 million from other private sources, including foundations, corporations, and individuals. Our mission: the pittsburgh promise promotes high educational aspirations among urban youth, funds scholarships for post-secondary access, and fuels a prepared and diverse regional workforce. See continuation on schedule oour vision: we envision a future where all our urban youth are equipped to reach post-secondary success, our public schools serve all children excellently, our city is flourishing in all its neighborhoods, and our workforce is widely diverse and highly skilled to advance a region that is good and just for all. Our guiding principles: -equity and inclusion: we are committed to educational, econominc, racial, social, and cultural equity and inclusion. -excellence: we conduct our work with urgency, steward our resources prudently, and apply the highest standards of professionalism. -integrity: we demonstrate accountability to our students, families, and community partners by performing our work with transparency, discipline, and compassion. -impact: we regularly evaluate our impact and use data and research to guide our decision-making. -commitment: we are driven by a passion for our vision and mission and a belief that our work strengthens the region, inspires systemic change, and transforms lives. The pittsburgh promise conducts outreach in all pittsburgh public high schools and its charters in an effort to cultivate relationships and promote achievement. In addition, they deploy promise coaches in four high schools to promote promise usage and post-secondary planning: perry, carrick, uprep/milliones and westinghouse high schools. In conjunction with the coaching initiative, the promise holds college and career exposure events for students in these schools. As of june 2025, the pittsburgh promise's results include the following: -more than 12,500 students received $183.9 million in promise scholarships; -they attended 153 post-secondary institutions across Pennsylvania; -more than 4,520 students graduated with a post-secondary degree or certification -promise alumni are working and contributing to more than 700 organizations in our region.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -63.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.61; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $720K · 28 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.