Altadena Rotary Charities

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954600758
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
3238166713
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,149,343
Expenses
$249,703
Assets
$3,753,655
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Steven Kerekes (President)

People named in this filing

  • Steven Kerekes (President)
  • Diana Yang (Treasurer)
  • Craig Cox (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Altadena Rotary Charities ARC was organized as a Public Benefit Organization for 3 broadly conceived purposes. 1st, ARC was founded in order to benefit the inhabitants of Altadena & Pasadena areas of the W. San Gabriel Valley of LA County, CA. by supporting the charitable & philanthropic work of the Rotary Club of Altadena through work projects & the provision of manpower to worthy causes & events, & other charitable organizations. Additionally, ARC was organized in order to support & oversee various charitable projects outside the local area, such as the support of house building projects in Mexico, support for the organization of Jr. Achievement in areas such as the nation of Armenia, & entrepreneurial programs in Nigeria. ARC was also organized in order to carry out the various public benefit projects of Rotary International.

What it reported doing in 2024

Vocational Service - Donated funds for scholarships to outstanding junior college students, for Middle School & High School student leadership training, for programs supporting High School youth in the areas of communication, music & entrepreneurship. Scholarship recipients are selected by their respective school or educational institutions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% 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

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: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 94
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.8%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 99.5%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 47th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 78.3%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 15.03; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.8% of revenue deployed · 99.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $248K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.