YWCA Greater Pittsburgh
Legal name: Yw Homes Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 251840807
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, United States
- Phone
- (412) 391-5100
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Low-Income & Subsidized Rental Housing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $93,154
- Expenses
- $235,783
- Assets
- $554,960
- Liabilities
- $2,258,202
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANGELA REYNOLDS (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- ANGELA REYNOLDS (CEO): $199,515 total reported compensation
- NICHELLE NELSON (VP OF PROGRAMS): $153,008 total reported compensation
- LISA SCANLON (VP OF FINANCIAL SERVICES): $146,035 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
YWCA Greater Pittsburgh is dedicated to eliminating racism, empowering women, and promoting peace, justice, freedom, and dignity for all. Established in 1867, YWCA Greater Pittsburgh (or the “Women’s Christian Association” as it was first named) was first staffed by volunteers. They established educational programs, launched safe housing programs, and created networks to support professional women. Like many of its sister Associations during the early 20th Century, YWCA Greater Pittsburgh ran racially segregated branches. In 1946, YWCAs committed to the Interracial Charter in order to move toward integration. Beginning in the 1970s, YWCA USA intensified its investment in increasing opportunity for all. And in 1996, YWCA GP launched the Center for Race Relations (now the Center for Race and Gender Equity) to educate, engage, ad.
What it reported doing in 2024
Providing affordable housing choices for low and moderate income individuals and families and to promote racially diverse communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 65.8%; rating input score 66
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 64th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -153.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.35; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 4.07; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 37.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 65.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $155K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.