Glendale Management Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710934158
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Glendale, CA, USA
Phone
8189378326
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$167,723
Expenses
$66,451
Assets
$615,036
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER ROBINSON (President)
  • NICOLE DE LA MORA (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • PETER ROBINSON (President)
  • NICOLE DE LA MORA (Vice President)
  • SIPAN ZADORYAN (Treasurer)

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

The purpose of the organization is to improve the terms and conditions of employment for the members of the association. The association will act independently to support issues, programs, and projects of interest to management, and to negotiate a collective bargaining agreement with the city of glendale on behalf of managers eligible for membership in this association.in furtherance of the organization's goal to improve the terms and conditions of employment within the city of glendale, this organization will provide support for charitable and social benefit activities. Any organizations receiving assistance from the association shall provide direct benefit to residents and/or businesses in the city of glendale.

What it reported doing in 2025

Meetings with city of glendale leaders to discuss improving the terms and conditions of employment for members of the association. Support of issues, programs and projects of interest to management employees of the city of glendale. Support of city officials who advocate programs and projects which are of interest to the management employees of the city of glendale.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.4%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 69.7%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 34.2%; rating input score 34; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.4%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.26; rating input score 89; 89th 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: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.4% of revenue deployed · 69.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 34/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.