Chinese Civic Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
760501683
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
7137721133
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$840,955
Expenses
$853,574
Assets
$1,439,511
Liabilities
$597,761

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Yuxin Fan (President)
  • Casey Chen (Vice President)
  • Wanqing Yang (Vice President)
  • Tiffany Zhang (Vice President)
  • Sally Sha (Vice President)
  • Deqing Yang (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Ke Chen (Director)
  • Yuxin Fan (President)
  • Casey Chen (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To Promte Cultural diversity and understanding for the Chinese community and other ethnic communities.

What it reported doing in 2025

Chinese Lunar New Year In order to build up multiculture community culture, a party was organized to celebrate the Chinese Lunar New Year. The funds received was used for organizing the program and will be used for culture education in the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.6%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 38.5%; rating input score 39
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -1.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.69; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.6% of revenue deployed · 38.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $329K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 24 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 39/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.