Desert Jade Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953559965
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
California City, CA, USA
Phone
7603822106
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Reported finances

Revenue
$-56,265
Expenses
$0
Assets
$1,065,630
Liabilities
$2,723

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Frances Johnson (Vice President)
  • Nicholas Lessenvitch DDS (President)

People named in this filing

  • Jennifer Williams (Secretary)
  • Frances Johnson (Vice President)
  • Jeanie Schroeder (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of Desert Jade Corporation is twofold. The specific and primary purpose of Desert Jade Corporation is to provide housing, health, and social services for senior citizens. Its general purpose is to sponsor programs of housing and related commerical and recreational facilities for senior citizens.

What it reported doing in 2019

Proided affordable housing to senior citizens.

Operating model

Revenue model
No positive adjusted resources. The filing reports no positive adjusted operating resources.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -100%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: Limited
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2014 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.