Downtown Senior Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953399047
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192397145
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Reported finances

Revenue
$28,488
Expenses
$243,989
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • E PERCIL STANFORD PHD (PRESIDENT)
  • CHANELL KACHI (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MAVOURNEEN O'CONNOR (PRESIDENT EMERITUS - SENIO)

Highest reported compensation

  • FRAN E KILBURG (TREASURER, SECRETARY, CFO): $167,902 total reported compensation
  • MAVOURNEEN O'CONNOR (PRESIDENT EMERITUS - SENIO): $152,029 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization was formed as a non-profit corporation in july 1979 to organize and operate a center exclusively for charitable purposes for the benefit of indigent elderly and the acquisition of properties in order to create and operate affordable, safe, superior quality housing for the san diego low income elderly, and related low income elderly services.

What it reported doing in 2020

The organization created and operated a center providing housing referrals and recreational facilities at the san diego kind corporation/san diego square complex located at 1055 ninth avenue in downtown san diego for the benefit of low income elderly.in, 1988, the organization purchased the new palace hotel, a residential hotel located at 1814 fifth avenue in downtown san diego. In the process of renovating the structure into a residential hotel for the needy elderly a fire destroyed the building. Renovations were completed and the hotel reopened in 1992 with 80 tax credit units for low income seniors.on february 11, 2014 san diego kind corporation (sdkc) sold/transferred the hud 202/8 low income senior housing project serving 154+ seniors to housing development partners (hdp), a non profit affiliate of the san diego housing commission, the housing authority for the city of san diego. Downtown senior center (dsc) continues to loan monies and donate services to help support sdkc, a 501 (c)(3) non profit corporation. Dsc also loans monies and donates services to fifth avenue corporation, a 501 (c)(3) non profit corporation and managing general partner of new palace associates, a low income senior tax credit property that served 80 seniors until the project was sold/transferred to hdp in 2016, ensuring fifty-five additional years of low income rental units and section 8 vouchers for the needy elderly.in subsequent years, the corporation has been intrically involved and a driving force with san diego kind corporation in it's efforts to design and develop a project in san diego serving seniors in an effort to meet critical housing and service needs. An innovative and cost-efficient project design was presented to the county of san diego winning a grant to study this design plan. The plan was approved and a lease with the county provided a site for 127 units insuring seventy years of low-income rental units and section 8 vouchers for the needy elderly. For over forty years, downtown senior center, has exhibited exemplary charitable and nonprofit services by providing funds and services for the exclusive, primary and eleemosynary purposes for the benefits of low-income seniors in the san diego community; in light of recent budgetary challenges on the part of downtown senior center; it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to raise the necessary funds to continue operations during the daunting covid-19 environment.downtown senior center, is no longer able to carry on with it's charitable endeavors given these budgetary constraints and therefore has elected to dissolve the corporation effective 12.31.2020.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 53
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.9%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -756.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 69.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -28.5% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -36.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $217K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 4 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.