Community Advocates Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481265472
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
9143195381
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Intergroup, Race Relations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$589,143
Expenses
$421,518
Assets
$235,501
Liabilities
$79,793

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rachel Lehrer (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Rachel Lehrer (President): $160,200 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Community advocates inc. Works to prevent harm and discrimination by promoting inclusive, safe, and resilient communities. Through education, advocacy, and digital innovation, the organization advances civil and human rights, reduces the drivers of abuse and toxic behavior, and supports initatives that foster emotional health, trust, shared leadership across, racial , ethnic, and gender lines.

What it reported doing in 2025

Digital harm reduction and prosocial design: partnered wtih game developers, moderators and online communities to develop and test features that reduce toxicity, promote emotional regulation, and build trust in large-male-dominateddigital spaces.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 60
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.6%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 79.8%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $68.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 28.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.6% of revenue deployed · 79.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $336K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 4 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.