Humangood Foundation South
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911931309
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Duarte, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8182470420
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Supportive Housing for Older Adults
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,506,293
- Expenses
- $2,093,819
- Assets
- $42,604,779
- Liabilities
- $1,385,140
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 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
The primary purpose of humangood foundation south (the "foundation") is to develop, invest and administer funds to provide residential and nursing home care on behalf of the residents of facilities of humangood socal, which is a related 501(c)(3) organization. The foundation's principal activity is to administer such funds under trust agreements.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 79
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.1%; rating input score 81
- Program expense ratio: 76.5%; rating input score 77
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 94%; rating input score 94; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.35; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 51.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.1% of revenue deployed · 76.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.6M · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 69 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.