Fundacrecer
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 853292781
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7144400298
- Rating
- 37
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $227,771
- Expenses
- $225,748
- Assets
- $12,049
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DEBORA PINERO (PRESIDENT)
- GABRIELA ALMENAR (CEO)
- NICOLAS PAVA (CEO)
People named in this filing
- DEBORA PINERO (PRESIDENT)
- GABRIELA ALMENAR (CEO)
- NICOLAS PAVA (CEO)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Supply nbsp; materials nbsp; and nbsp; good nbsp; to nbsp; help nbsp; the nbsp; fullfilment nbsp; of nbsp; basic nbsp; needs nbsp; such nbsp; as nbsp; education nbsp; and nbsp; health nbsp; services nbsp; to nbsp; people nbsp; who nbsp; have nbsp; limited nbsp; access nbsp; to nbsp; those nbsp; good nbsp; and nbsp; services
What it reported doing in 2025
Supply materials and good to help the fullfillment of basic needs such as education and health services to people who have limited access to those goods and services
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The strongest available result is that reported spending and fundraising are generally efficient. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 46
- Transparency & Controls: 45
- Accountability: 18
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.5%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 52%; rating input score 52
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 72.7%; rating input score 73; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: Limited
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.9%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -34.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -30.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51.5% of revenue deployed · 52% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 14 of 17 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 52/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.