Center for Lupus Care

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
753120521
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Inglewood, CA, USA
Phone
3103657990
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specifically Named Diseases

Reported finances

Revenue
$18,910
Expenses
$19,160
Assets
$14,069
Liabilities
$2,750

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HELLEN SHAW-STABLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JARED MORGAN (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA GURULE (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • HELLEN SHAW-STABLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JARED MORGAN (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA GURULE (VICE PRESIDENT)

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

Is to educate the general population about systmic and discid lupus eryhematous, commonly known as sle or lupus, with emphasis on patients developing coping skills, researching the latest information on lupus, raising awareness and advocating for any patient and or family

What it reported doing in 2024

Is to educate the general population about systmic and discid lupus eryhematous, commonly known as sle or lupus, with emphasis on patients developing coping skills, researching the latest information on lupus, raising awareness and advocating for any patient and or family member while partnering with other agenies and companies to get the maximun benefits for our patients.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.3%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.