The Public Sector Consortium Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 205201451
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Cambridge, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6175478448
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $136,523
- Expenses
- $119,706
- Assets
- $526,266
- Liabilities
- $138,571
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GEORGIANNA BISHOP (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- GEORGIANNA BISHOP (PRESIDENT): $27,365 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Re-invent practice of public leadership for the public good.
What it reported doing in 2024
The public sector consortium, inc.'s misssion is to "re-invent the practice of public leadership for the public good." we identified the skills and competencies that are essential for a new model of public leadership and we incorporate them into our curriculum.we are currently focused on the need to provide leaders with advanced skills that will re-define high performance as both mission accomplished and the sustainability of resources (human, natural & financial) for future generations. With the current crisis in areas of public health crisis, climate change, fiscal sustainability, and hiring leaders who are alumni of our programs and current participants can see in real time the importantce of skilled leaders who are practiced in systems thinking and premeptive leadership actions which can save lives, and resources. Our systems thinking program is tailored to the public sector. Chapter three of the systems thinking program for public leaders is entitled foresight and intervention. We developed two on-line programs during covid when classroom work was not possible. Systems thinking in the age of contagious disease and public service practices. We have provided facilitation strategies for public leaders, systems thinking, negotiation skills and strategic alignment for high performance to public leaders, legislators and community leaders in the towns/cities of new england. Our current focus is at the state and local levels but we have also worked with the u.s. Department of veterans affairs, (senior executive prep program) gao, epa, sec, fhfa. We have also worked with the coast guard and naval students at the fletcher school of law and diplomacy as well as a joint group of leaders from brigham and women's hospital at the harvard school of public health. Beginning in 2012 the public sector consortium (psc) in partnership with the pell center at salve regina university in newport, ri, and the lincoln institute of land policy in cambridge ma designed and delivered a unique system of leadership learning and application for municipal leaders, elected state legislators, non-profit leaders and academic leaders called leadership matters. Leadership matters is a two phased leadership development program. In the first phase, each community registers four leaders for eight days of classroom instruction in; facilitative leadership, systems thinking, negotiation practices for public leaders, and strategic alignment for high performance. The psc developed the curriculum and provides the faculty for the programs. In the second phase of the program, the leadership teams work with additional colleagues in their organizations to achieve their innovation projects. The projects are designed to provide improved services to their organization, municipality, state or community. Training and mentored coaching is designed to assure the transference of skills learned in the classrrom to the workplace. The psc supports each participating community with additional training and coaching from experienced certified coaches and former public leaders. The goal is to create a community of leaders across each state who have an enhanced capcity to govern and achieve outcomes which exceed citizen expectations. We consistently review and upgrade our program content to assure we are current and up to date. We have a team of virtual contractors who serve as faculty, program managers and support specialists. They make it possible for us to offer high quality learning experiences at accessible prices to public sector organizations (local state and federal). In 2024 the psc continued to offer scholarships and raise money to make it possible for muncipalities and state agencies without training resources to access our programs. We work to develop new approaches to learning and topics that are on the frontier of public leadership practices such as sustainable leadership and transitions skills for leaders. We have upgraded the free learning available on our website with th
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 86% 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 53
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 57
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55.2%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 68.1%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.3%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.4; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 22.9%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 55.2% of revenue deployed · 68.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $81K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $27K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.