Donated Vehicle Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
823213823
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Woodland Hills, CA, USA
Phone
8182989893
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$138,536
Expenses
$610,945
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$782,399

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NILOAR AMIER (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • NILOAR AMIER (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $52,122 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Dvf is organized and operated to support various charitable activities and organizations by operating vehicle donation programs and services. In particular, dvf initially intends its operations to benefit organizations in the state of California that provide low-cost or free medical equipment to indigent patients and individuals. These individuals are most in need of this form of assistance due to the frequent lack of insurance coverage for medical devices and equipment, which presents them with the option of either paying exorbitant sums out of pocket, or foregoing the assistance provided by this equipment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Operations to benefit other non-profit organizations

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 13
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.3%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 5
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -341%; rating input score 0; 0th 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: 8.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -21% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.3% of revenue deployed · 4.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.