Insideout Writers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954722308
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3236601866
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Delinquency Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,457,958
Expenses
$1,513,912
Assets
$2,845,179
Liabilities
$106,190

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JIMMY WU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JIMMY WU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $158,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of insideout writers is to reduce the juvenile recidivism rate by providing a range of services that evolves to meet the needs of currently and formerly incarcerated youth and young adults. Using creative writing as a catalyst for personal transformation, these young people are empowered with the knowledge and skills necessary to successfully re-integrate into our communities, becoming advocates for their future.

What it reported doing in 2024

Alumni program - recognizing the critical need for comprehensive reentry programs, iow launched the alumni program in 2009 to provide a continuum of care for writing program students to support their transition back into our communities. The goal of the alumni program is to reduce participants likelihood of reoffending and to increase their skills and capacity to become self-sustaining, productive members of our communities. The alumni program is comprised of six interconnected components: 1) transitional case management, 2) life skills workshops, 3) mentoring, 4) writing classes, 5) community engagement activities, and 6) cultural events and field trips.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.8%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 10th 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: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 38.4%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.8% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $158K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.