Childrens Health Guild

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453767735
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lafayette, CA, USA
Phone
9252834411
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$502,138
Expenses
$496,985
Assets
$316,719
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LEXIE WOOLLEY (President)
  • MEG GEIST (President)
  • ADIRA WEIXLMANN (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • LEXIE WOOLLEY (President)
  • MEG GEIST (President)
  • ADIRA WEIXLMANN (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

The Children's Health Guild is a group of sixty-six energetic Bay Area women who dedicate their time and talent to raise funds on behalf of UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland and the George Mark Children's House. Originally founded as St. Lukes Junior Auxiliary, our group has raised funds for over 50 years to support pediatric medical care in San Francisco. As our membership has migrated to the East Bay, our organization was re-launched in 2012 as the Children's Health Guild to provide financial support to two local pediatric medical facilities. The Children's Health Guild is proud to support UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital Oakland and the George Mark Children's House because they provide children and their families with health care services for a child's full cycle of life. Together, they support emergency care, on-going treatment, transitional, respite, and end-of-life care for children.

What it reported doing in 2024

Children's health guild holds two fundraisers during the year. The first was a holiday luncheon event held in december 2024. The second event was a spring event held in april of 2025. The net proceeds from these fundraisers were used to provide grants to both ucsf benioff children's hospital oakland and the george mark children's house.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 1%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 29; 29th 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: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 66 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $457K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 32 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.