Harc Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205719074
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Palm Desert, CA, USA
Phone
7604041945
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,199,989
Expenses
$1,311,723
Assets
$390,579
Liabilities
$157,435

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNA LECOMTE-HINELY PHD (CEO)
  • VERONICA BARAJAS BA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNA LECOMTE-HINELY PHD (CEO): $201,213 total reported compensation
  • CASSAUNDRA LEIER PHD (DIR.OF RESEA): $161,449 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Harc is a nonprofit that advances quality of life by helping community leaders use objective research and analysis to turn data into action.

What it reported doing in 2024

Harc worked on 23 different paid consulting projects during fy 24-25, including: community needs assessments/asset profiles: 1. Betty ford center: community health needs assessment (chna) and implementation strategy (is) plan. 2. Eisenhower medical center: provided the community engagement portion of their community health needs assessment (chna). 3. Tri-district head start: early childhood education community needs assessment for the head starts of coachella valley unified school district, desert sands unified school district, and palm springs unified school district. 4. Nevada department of veterans services: needs assessment for veterans in the state of Nevada. 5. Riverside university health system public health: survey focused on violence prevention and community safety study among riverside county residents. 6. San diego county: creation of a community asset data matrix and community asset profiles for five communities in san diego county. 7. San mateo county medical center: assistance with needs assessment activities for the healthcare for the homeless/farmworker health project (a federally qualified health center). Evaluations: 1. Dap health: evaluation of a universal basic income pilot project for people living in palm springs. 2. Kaiser permanente: evaluation of a grant funding of national medical respite programs across 20 locations. 3. New directions: evaluation of the behavioral health recovery services project. 4. Regional access project (rap) foundation/npo centric: evaluation survey design services for the nonprofit rescue + residence. 5. Regional access project (rap) foundation: evaluation of the npo centric program. 6. Riverside community health foundation: evaluation of the eastside climate collaborate projects. 7. Starting over: evaluation of a rental assistance (ra) program for formerly incarcerated individuals. 8. Starting over: evaluation of the hear-us program that provides recovery support for people after their release from prison. 9. Starting over: evaluation of the warm hand-off (who) program, which helps people find housing after being released from prison. Other consulting projects: 1. Carb/aclima: statewide mobile monitoring initiative (smmi) community engagement lead in six ie communities (chiriaco summit, corona, jurupa valley, rancho cucamonga, riverside, and san bernardino). 2. Companion animal survey: survey of owners/guardians of companion animals in the coachella valley for animal samaritans, loving all animals, friends of the palm springs animal shelter, and riverside county department of animal services. 3. Data equity center at the university of California, los angeles: part of a roster of consultants available for technical assistance related to promoting data equity. 4. Innercare: patient satisfaction surveys for more than a dozen medical and dental clinics in riverside and imperial counties (a federally qualified health center system). 5. San diego county: analyzed and reported results of a countywide "community partner survey" for the county's public health services. 6. South coast air quality management district: creation of an environmental health report for the coachella valley using calenviroscreen data and harc data. 7. We are one united: assistance with the "uplifting boys and men of color" project for san diego county collaborations. Harc staff were active in several community groups/collaboratives, including: ark of safety/roadmap to resiliency in the inland empire association of fundraising professionals, desert communities chapter borrego health board of trustees coachella valley resource collaborative inland empire disabilities collaborative inland empire health plan community partner network latino health collaborative riverside county health coalition riverside latino network uc riverside school of medicine - member of the community advisory board uc riverside school of medicine, social medicine, population, and public health department - adjunct faculty uc riverside, ce

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.6%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 87.5%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.6% of revenue deployed · 87.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $201K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $397K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.