Intermediary Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874575710
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Carson, CA, USA
Phone
8058643436
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$231,539
Expenses
$232,547
Assets
$44,321
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dr Adriene Davis (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Keya Allen (Board President)
  • Dr Euvonka Farabee (Board Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dr Adriene Davis (Chief Executive Officer): $127,466 total reported compensation
  • Juliana Rosas (Program Manager): $20,393 total reported compensation
  • Sophia Alexander (Budget Manager): $18,748 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Intermediary Development Corporation advances equitable workforce development by providing program design apprenticeship strategy employer engagement capacity building and technical assistance to education workforce industry and nonprofit partners.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Intermediary Development Corporation was a crucial workforce intermediary that played a pivotal role in enhancing regional coordination among education workforce industry and community stakeholders. The organizations primary focus was on fostering the development and alignment of career pathways and workforce initiatives through various services such as program design apprenticeship strategy employer engagement and technical assistance. By convening cross-sector partners facilitating collaboration between employers and training providers supporting apprenticeships and work-based learning and integrating workforce and education systems the organization significantly strengthened the regional workforce infrastructure. These efforts ensured that training programs were in line with labor market demands and aimed to provide equal access to high-quality job opportunities for all individuals within the community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.3%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 75%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.3% of revenue deployed · 75% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $174K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $127K · 12 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.