Humangood Cornerstone
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300184304
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Duarte, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9259247100
- Rating
- 49
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,390,000
- Expenses
- $1,822,481
- Assets
- $4,518,282
- Liabilities
- $67,795
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN H COCHRANE III (PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- JOHN H COCHRANE III (PRESIDENT/CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $1,566,593 total reported compensation
- DANIEL OGUS (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $1,147,903 total reported compensation
- ANDREW MCDONALD (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $758,654 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. And when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. Continued on schedule o.because we believe this, our mission is to inspire your best life.we do that by working hand-in-hand to create experiences that matter to you.
What it reported doing in 2024
Humangood cornerstone was formed in 1999 and is the parent company for humangood's non-California affilliates. It facilitates redevelopment and growth and provides a structure for affiliation while protecting the credit capacity of its affiliates.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Affiliate-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
- 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
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: 41
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 23
- Sustainability: 73
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 35.3%; rating input score 35
- Program expense ratio: 65.7%; rating input score 66
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 46.2%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.48; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 67.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 35.3% of revenue deployed · 65.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.6M · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $2.5M reported
- Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 141 filed related-organization links
- 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 35/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.