Community Solidarity Projects
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 871594089
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $83,023
- Expenses
- $85,527
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $2,504
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Michelle E Manos (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Michelle E Manos (Executive Director)
- Lauren L Hammel (Program Director 99 Operations)
- Ralph Green (Warehouse Lead)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to grow the infrastructure of the grassroots movement in Los Angeles and beyond to help bring the ability of the community to impact structural change to the next level and to develop a network of collective resources which is accessible by organizations and organizers that represent societys most-marginalized communities.
What it reported doing in 2025
Community Solidarity Project CSP participates in a network coalition of trusted organizations wherein we give and receive pallet goods such as hygiene items household items first aid and other similar resources. These items are distributed to the families we support as well as our partner organizations. We also began distributing furniture during our response to the 2025 LA fires.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.3%; rating input score 81
- Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 36.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.3% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $68K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.