Economic Development Corporation of Los Angeles County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953643339
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2132364826
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,176,161
Expenses
$9,994,572
Assets
$35,302,763
Liabilities
$6,147,033

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

106 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN CHEUNG (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN CHEUNG (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $426,154 total reported compensation
  • KENDAL R TURNER (EXECUTIVE VICE PRES./CFO): $277,888 total reported compensation
  • JERMAINE HAMPTON (VP WORKFORCE DEV'T & SPECIAL PROJECTS): $221,852 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The function of the corporation shall be to ease the burdens of government by assisting, implementing, supporting and/or contributing to the support of programs, projects and activities of a public nature. Which are directed toward improving economic conditions throughout los angeles county, and educating the public through economic research, analysis and otherwise. By serving as a vehicle to facilitate cooperation between the public and private sector. The corporation will coalesce local, state and federal resources to increase private investment, particulary in the economically distressed areas of said county. Through the collaboration with community, government, business, labor and education partners to inform and advance our data - driven and evidence-based approach, we endeavor to achieve a reimagined regional economy - growing, equitable, sustainable, and resilient- that provides healthy and high standard of living for all.

What it reported doing in 2024

Workforce developmentlaedc's workforce development program exists to create economic mobility and equity, support the talent needs of business, and align education with evolving industry trends. Workforce development is integrated into laedc's research, business assistance, industry council work and the fabric of our mission. We work in both the strategic leadership capacity to support systems change and in a programmatic action level to drive progress.during the year, the organization engaged with 25,000+ los angeles county students and job seekers. Collaborated to align training with industry demand with 250+ employer and colleges.strategic initiativesthe laedc implemented a series of strategic initiatives to address the evolving needs of the regional labor market. These efforts included collaborating with local community colleges to develop curriculum aligned with industry demands and supporting workers seeking to re-enter the workforce. Additionally, the organization advanced its digital equity program to bridge the digital divide, providing access and resources to underserved communities to enhance workforce readiness and economic opportunities.special projects (California jobs first)the California jobs first program, with the laedc serving as the regional convener, is focused on fostering diverse local economies and building sustainable industries across los angeles county. This initiative aims to generate high-quality, accessible employment opportunities while promoting equitable and inclusive economic growth throughout the region.in 2025, California jobs first project secured $2 million in state funding to support wildfire recovery and resilience efforts.coed (center of economic development)the southern California leadership council, a program sponsored by the laedc and also known as the center for economic development, plays a critical role in ensuring the region's economic vitality and quality of life. Addressing the complex economic and social challenges facing southern California requires effective leadership, which is often hindered by the region's vast size and multifaceted nature. The council works to provide strategic guidance and foster collaboration to tackle these issues and promote sustainable growth.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.53; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 90 of 90 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $426K · 106 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $625K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.