Collective Voices Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264418772
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
6263543144
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Delinquency Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$13
Expenses
$8,406
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELLIE BITARAF (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • DIANA FISHER (PRES. & ED)
  • ELIZABETH SILBER (Secretary)
  • ELLIE BITARAF (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The collective voices foundation aims to bring learning to life for under-resourced youth through customized educational programs in collaboration with teachers, schools, and community partners. Our programs range across disciplines and have included subjects in science, music, movement, leadership, and social and emotional development.

What it reported doing in 2017

In 2017 the Collective Voices Foundation completed the necessary steps to liquidate the corporation. Final grant made to Huntington library as approved by the California attorney general.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% 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 total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 51.3%; rating input score 51

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -64,561.5%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -69.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -39.1% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -45.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 51.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2017
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.