Foundation for the Los Angeles Community Colleges

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954106993
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2138912090
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,440,705
Expenses
$7,951,278
Assets
$11,744,079
Liabilities
$673,933

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • FRANCISCO RODRIGUEZ (DIR./LACCD CHANCELLOR(THRU 11/24)): $549,791 total reported compensation
  • JEANETTE GORDON (LACCD CFO): $463,348 total reported compensation
  • KELLY KING (E.D/SECRETARY): $309,233 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 support the success of the students, programs, and colleges of the los angeles community college district and to advance access to postsecondary education and training in the greater los angeles region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Providing overall support and serving the los angeles community college district (the district). Promoting the district, receiving property and gifts for the benefit of the district, establishment of scholarships, support for alumni activities, and the enhancement of the district through public relations outreach programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 97.1%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20,126.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.5%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.8%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 58.3% of revenue deployed · 97.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 21 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $7.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $550K · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.