Covia Group

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 941591805
IRS 990 coverage: 2010–2021
Forms available: Form 990 2021
Location: Glendale, CA, USA
Phone: 9259567400
Rating: 65
Verdict: SUPPORTED
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $120,804
Expenses: $297,338
Assets: $0
Liabilities: $0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

John Woodward (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

John Woodward (CEO): $1,042,970 total reported compensation
Diana Jamison (TREASURER, CFO): $766,608 total reported compensation
Eduardo Salvador (CFO): $592,875 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of covia group is to support its affiliates' missions by identifying, funding, and developing strategic growth opportunities in quality non-profit senior housing and support services.

What it reported doing in 2021

On behalf of its subsidiary supported organizations, covia group explored one continuing and one new expansion opportunity related to the continuing care retirement community mission; one new expansion opportunity related to the affordable housing mission; and one new expansion opportunity related to the home and community based services mission. As of the end of the year, all four expansion opportunities continue to be explored and are under active consideration by the supported organizations. Covia group explored providing management services to continuing care communities. Currently management services are being provided to one continuing care community.

Operating model

Revenue model: Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 74
Transparency & Controls: 58
Accountability: 91
Sustainability: 1
Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
Program expense ratio: 53.6%; rating input score 54
Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
Foreign activity oversight: Limited
Grant itemization coverage: Limited
Major donor itemization: Limited
Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -146.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
Officer compensation ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: -26.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 53.6% of spending went to programs
Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $159K in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
Filing history: 10 filing years from 2010 to 2021
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
Related organizations: 19 filed related-organization links
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.

High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 54/100.
High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.