Greater West Hollywood Food Coalition

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464079412
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2136340163
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Food, Agriculture, and Nutrition N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$80,080
Expenses
$58,739
Assets
$21,341
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Doris Presley (President)
  • Sarah Black (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Ted Landreth (Secretary)
  • Doris Presley (President)
  • Sarah Black (Vice President)

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to prevent and end homelessness while ensuring the immediate needs of those experiencing homelessness are met and their civil rights are protected.

What it reported doing in 2013

Hot Meal Program -GWHFC, a broad-based grass-roots organization, served the homeless and hungry every day since 1987! Every night between 6:15 and 7:30 a community comes together at the barren street corner of Sycamore and Romaine, along the border of Hollywood and West Hollywood. On one side of the table are the volunteers. On the other side are between 150 and 200 men and women who have somehow fallen through the cracks, and for whom the meal they are about to each, sumptuous as it is, might well be the only meal they have all day.During the fourth quarter 2013, we served 13,800 hot, healthy, nutritious and absolutely free meals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.9%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 99.4%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.6%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.9% of revenue deployed · 99.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 1 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $58K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.