Equality California Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680438008
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3238289801
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,648,683
Expenses
$5,087,333
Assets
$2,728,252
Liabilities
$793,152

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACKIE THOMAS (PRESIDENT)
  • JUAN CAMACHO (PRESIDENT ELECT.)
  • JEFF FREITAS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TONY HOANG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TONY HOANG (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $313,441 total reported compensation
  • THOMAS TEMPRANO (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $169,025 total reported compensation
  • VALERIE PLOUMPIS (NATIONAL POLICY DIRECTOR): $165,407 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To create a world that is healthy, just and fully equal for all lgbtq+ people.

What it reported doing in 2024

Equality California institute equips lgbtq+ and allied stakeholders with the tools and resources necessary to conduct advocacy at the state and local level. In partnership with the California department of social services, our stop the hate project gathers leaders in the lgbtq+ community to develop ideas for addressing the rise in hate crimes and harassment of lgbtq+ people, and other marginalized communities. Our out against big tobacco program in the central valley ensure that local communities are aware of predatory advertising by big tobacco in lgbtq+ communities and have the tools to advocate for policies to curb that influence in their local communities. Fair share for equality convenes lgbtq+ leaders across the state each year to discuss budget priorities and develop a strategy for state and local budget advocacy in support of lgbtq+ resources. The biennial safe and supportive schools report card provides unified school districts across the state with the opportunity to transparently share their policies and practices for creating a safe school climate. Once the results of the report card are published, equality California institute staff trains student, parent, and educator stakeholders how to use the report card as an advocacy tool for promoting safe school climates for lgbtq+ students and staff. Equality California institute also conducts ongoing civic engagement and voter registration efforts, with the aim of ensuring high voter turnout and exceptional levels of civic engagement from lgbtq+ californians.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 85.9%; rating input score 86; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.7% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $313K · 34 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 29 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 29 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.