Diaper Bank of the Inland Empire
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 993578911
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Riverside, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9513313303
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $153,034
- Expenses
- $88,432
- Assets
- $69,379
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Claire Cozad (President)
People named in this filing
- Claire Cozad (President)
- Mandy Hyde (Treasurer)
- Danny Gonzales (Secretary)
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
The Diaper Bank of the Inland Empire provided essential diapering supplies to low-income families across the Inland Empire.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Diaper Bank of the Inland Empire provided essential diapering supplies to low-income families across the Inland Empire. In 2025, the organization served 917 unique children in 734 households, impacting 2,963 family members.The organization distributed 220,850 diapers, 15,960 pull-ups, and 4,676 wipes, generating an estimated $82,926.20 in economic impact for families. Ninety-two percent of families served were classified as extremely low income, and 70% of caregivers were unemployed or underemployed.Program service expenses for 2025 totaled $66,821.50, including diaper supplies, payroll, occupancy, and operational costs necessary to conduct distributions.Services were delivered through both emergency and recurring distributions to ensure consistent access to basic hygiene necessities for vulnerable families.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 61
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.1%; rating input score 48
- Program expense ratio: 83.2%; rating input score 83
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 42.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 48.1% of revenue deployed · 83.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $74K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.