Community Clinic Association of Los Angeles County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 954576023
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2132016500
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health, General and Financing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,847,663
- Expenses
- $12,673,807
- Assets
- $14,766,784
- Liabilities
- $4,569,700
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LOUISE MCCARTHY (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- LOUISE MCCARTHY (CEO): $380,068 total reported compensation
- ROSIE JADIDIAN (PHARMACIST): $212,676 total reported compensation
- NINA VACCARO (COO): $212,048 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ccalac empowers community health centers to remain at the forefront of health care transformation. We forge partnerships, foster innovation, promote health equity, and advocate for the communities they serve.
What it reported doing in 2024
Ccalac (community clinic association of los angeles county) has grown to be the largest regional association of community clinics and health centers in California. Community clinics provide primary health care, including medical, dental, and mental health services, to under resourced populations across los angeles county. They serve all, regardless of ability to pay. Ccalac's central role is to help its members serve their patients in an efficient and cost-effective manner while providing quality care. Ccalac connects clinics, and it shares and leverages resources. Ccalac strives to identify and address the collective needs of its member clinics at the local, state and federal levels. It delivers a variety of services including education, peer support, and increasing organizational capacity. Ccalac also provides ongoing training and education for clinics, pharmacists, and physicians. It also raises a unified voice on behalf of clinics with policy advocacy.
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 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 91
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $188.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 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: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.17; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $380K · 20 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.