Esperanza Youth and Family Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330594902
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2013
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Coachella, CA, USA
Phone
7603980711
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$148,572
Expenses
$119,531
Assets
$45,047
Liabilities
$719

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Patricia Johnson (President)
  • Vivian Perez (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • Patricia Johnson (President)
  • Terri Villegas-Fowler (Board Member)
  • Pablo Hernandez (Board Member)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission is to provide programs and services which are educational, supportive and recreational in nature, and which also assist the youth and families of the Coachella Valley. These programs and services are designed to address the on-going evolution of social issues which weaken and threaten the well-being of our youth their families, and the community.

What it reported doing in 2013

Provided various educational and recreational activities that educate youth andtheir families about high risk behaviors such as substance abuse, teenage pregnancies, school drop-outs, gang involvement, etc.

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
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.9%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 79.5%; rating input score 79

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.5%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.38; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.9% of revenue deployed · 79.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $95K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.