Gailen & Cathy Reevers Center for Community Empowerment Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954861868
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2023
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$196,320
Expenses
$150,823
Assets
$131,980

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Yvonne Anderson (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Helena Williams (Chairman)
  • Dr Kim Benjamin (Vice Chair)
  • Wendell Miller (Secretary)

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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Gailen and Cathy Reevers Center for Community Empowerment promotes and strengthens families and communities by offering education health recreation and cultural enrichment programs.

What it reported doing in 2023

Over the past year our organization has worked tirelessly with our community partners on the Sugar Hill Arts Revival Project SHARP. This collaborative initiative is not just about revitalizing and re-imagining the Sugar Hill Arts District in Los Angeles but about making a lasting impact on our community. Were honoring the legacy of our ancestors and sparking a renaissance in urban Los Angeles a rebirth or revival of art architecture literature culture style and history.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.8%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 50.6%; rating input score 51

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: 23.2%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.8% of revenue deployed · 50.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $76K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.