Access California Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330826205
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Anaheim, CA, United States
Phone
(714) 917-0440
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers
Affiliation
Islam

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,880,870
Expenses
$4,171,047
Assets
$16,307,830
Liabilities
$69,138

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Nahla Kayali (Exec. Director): $195,367 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To empower all underserved populations by providing culturally and linguistically sensitive services to create a sense of belonging and a safe haven for resettling in Orange County.

What it reported doing in 2025

Refugee Social Services (County of Orange) The goal of the Refugee Social Services contract is to provide employment and supportive services to refugees in Orange County. Access California Services staff provide services including mentoring and case management to assist clients in overcoming barriers, achieve and maintain stable employment and economic self-sufficiency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 78% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 85
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.9%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 78.8%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 39.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.91; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 14 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 50.9% of revenue deployed · 78.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported · 1 of 6 affiliation controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $195K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.