A Touch of Love Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330914670
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Ventura, CA, USA
Phone
8056412800
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$208,643
Expenses
$220,003
Assets
$844,211
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WAYNE GALLER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • WAYNE GALLER (PRESIDENT): $80,495 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Free education, medical care and housing support for very poor families. We have 27 tutors a day helping 13 schools worth of children. Also widows, widowers, single moms and elderly with monthly help. Continuous medical care for elderly, single moms and children, with liver transplants, hip operations, etc. We help families in the us with cancer, bone marrow transplants, heart operations, loss of housing and rare disability issues.

What it reported doing in 2025

India- rent and tuition for families and their children. In maharashtra schools we provided uniforms, books, tuitions and school supplies for 240 children. For tibetan students we paid their private school tuition ranging from preschool to college. Also single moms and elderly up to 91 years old received rental and food assistance. In south india we added 2 more villages to our tutions program to help children whose parents can't read or write. We provided 6 village after school tuition programs for 232 students daily. Also widow and family monthly assistance.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.5%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 50.7%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -5.4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.84; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.5% of revenue deployed · 50.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $112K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 53/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.