California Opioid Maintenance Providers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330530089
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Encino, CA, USA
Phone
3235569200
Rating
32
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$223,207
Expenses
$369,123
Assets
$546,107
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON KLETTER PHD (President)
  • Joan Zweben PHD (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jennifer Alley (Executive Dir.): $182,718 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The California opiod maintenance providers ("comp") is a business trade organization to promote the treatment of substance use disorders, especially addictions to opiates such as heroin, oxycodone, morphine, vicodin, etc., with medication assisted treatment("mat") - methadone, buprenophine and other drugs approved for such treatment through trainings, policy testimony, education of public & policy makers about the benefits of mat.

What it reported doing in 2024

Comp employed public policy and health care reform policy experts, as follows: a public policy consultant to advise on public policy issues and impacts of federal and state legislation and regulations: $96,300

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 90%; rating input score 90; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -65.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 49.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -19.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $183K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.