Coachella Valley Rescue Mission

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952684844
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Indio, CA, USA
Phone
7603473512
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,521,549
Expenses
$18,492,215
Assets
$20,633,666
Liabilities
$547,249

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMANDA GALINDO (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGELA REGAN (CFO): $85,859 total reported compensation
  • AMANDA GALINDO (CEO): $80,962 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To serve those in need by sharing the saving grace of jesus christ through the provision of food, shelter, clothing, and spiritual recovery. And a place where daily physical and spiritual needs may be met.

What it reported doing in 2025

The coachella valley rescue mission (cvrm) provides temporary food and shelter for the homeless and assists in finding permanent housing and employment. Clients who live in the mission receive food and shelter and also participate in job skills training. Cvrm is an operational mission, and clients train in various areas such as facilities, administration, kitchen, catering, thrift store, landscaping, and security. Each of the seven training areas prepares clients to work locally at restaurants, department stores, construction, and entertainment here in the desert. The public also receives hot meals in our publiic breakfast/lunch/dinner services. In 2025, this mission served over 328,000 meals for hungry and hurting men, women, and children. Cvrm prepared and distributed 6,480 food boxes throughout the year, which served over 7,000 children in families who had to choose between food and rent. Cvrm provided conformtable and safe shelter in the form of a bed to 77,895 homeless individuals. Volunteers blessed cvrm with 7,000 hours of service helping those in need. With the 2025 grants for housing, cvrm has assisted 91 people within 34 households into their own independent homes through case management for budgeting, preparing for their new home and follow up after placement, and the provision of rental deposits and first few months rent. In 2025, cvrm outreach team traveled 5 days a week, served 3,410 individuals, distributed 30,044 hygiene, food and water items, and encouraged 25 people to come to cvrm for programs services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.4% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $16.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $86K · 12 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $892K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.