Chinatown Community Development Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942514053
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, US
Phone
(415) 984-1450
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,250,648
Expenses
$37,346,024
Assets
$203,462,502
Liabilities
$177,941,910

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MALCOLM YEUNG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MALCOLM YEUNG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $316,621 total reported compensation
  • WHITNEY JONES (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $244,649 total reported compensation
  • TAMMY HUNG (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS): $239,727 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To build healthy, affordable communities in San Francisco's Chinatown and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program and planning - ccdc provides multilingual community education on housing issues and has organized grassroots tenant groups that advocate for affordable housing and imporved living conditions. Ccdc also provides housing counseling to tenants and are often the first line of defence for low-income residents who have housing needs. Ccdc supports small businesses with navigating existing city regulations and advocates for programs that support small businesses. Ccdc's collaboration with local government and volunteer groups has resulted in hundreds of environmental improvements around the city. Ccdc engages immrgrant youth, including low-income youth living in sro hotels. In leadership development activities. Ccdc engages youth in service learning activities that encourage interactions with elderly residents to promote intergenerational sharing experience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 56.2%; rating input score 56; 12th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -23.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.45; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.87; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 76.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $28.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $317K · 34 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $236K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 35 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 41 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.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.