Impact Urban America
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 330809928
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2015–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2009
- Location
- San Diego, CA, USA
- Rating
- 34
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Urban, Community Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $60,997
- Expenses
- $61,017
- Assets
- $461
- Liabilities
- $261,628
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ESTEAN LENYOUN (President & CEO)
People named in this filing
- ESTEAN LENYOUN (President & CEO)
- ROSEY GRIER (Chairman)
- THOMAS SUDBERRY (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization's primary exempt purpose is to reduce the inner city's dependency upon the government programs and welfare. The concept is to take those who are underprivileged, at-risk or unemployed and provide spiritual renewal, life and job accountability skills and economic and business development.Therefore, Impact Urban America, Inc. opened our doors to the public in November 1998 and we were able in our first year (six months only) to interview and process about 2,000 people. Based upon feedback from our employees, letters of commendation from business partners, awards received from community-based organizations and governmental agencies year after year, IUA is making a vast impact on the community we pledged to serve. From an introspective analysis, our organization can be looked upon as being a beacon of light in the heart of darkness serving as:-A faith-based training and employment self sufficiency source.-Change agents to transform the lives of at-risk youth, women and men
What it reported doing in 2015
Continued service to the inner city residents in attempting to provide options to government assitance
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.2%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0.2%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 567.52; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.2% of revenue deployed · 0.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $100 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.