Hss Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 372157057
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3104621322
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $425,450
- Expenses
- $475,437
- Assets
- $25,929
- Liabilities
- $-36,721
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NICOLE THOMPSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- NICOLE THOMPSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $20,000 total reported compensation
- GERALD THOMPSON (DIRECTOR): $9,339 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our nbsp; mission nbsp; is nbsp; dedicated nbsp; to nbsp; providing nbsp; housing nbsp; and nbsp; supportive nbsp; services nbsp; with nbsp; transitional nbsp; housing nbsp; services nbsp; facilitated nbsp; temporary nbsp; housing nbsp; solutions nbsp; for nbsp; individuals nbsp; and nbsp; families nbsp; experiencing nbsp; life nbsp; changes nbsp; our nbsp; program nbsp; has nbsp; also nbsp; expanded nbsp; its nbsp; mental nbsp; health nbsp; and nbsp; substance nbsp; abuse nbsp; counseling nbsp; services nbsp; we nbsp; aim nbsp; to nbsp; develop nbsp; further nbsp; partnerships nbsp; with nbsp; local nbsp; employers nbsp; and nbsp; educational nbsp; institutions nbsp; to nbsp; better nbsp; assist nbsp; residents nbsp; in nbsp; achieving nbsp; long-term nbsp; stability nbsp; and nbsp; independence
What it reported doing in 2025
Operation services programs
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 56
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 13
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 0th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $475K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 2 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 9 of 16 current checks pass · 7 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.