Just in Time for Foster Youth

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205448416
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192695138
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,649,456
Expenses
$6,286,068
Assets
$5,296,187
Liabilities
$807,696

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DONALD WELLS (Executive Dir.): $202,820 total reported compensation
  • DIANE COX (DEVELOPMENT DIR): $175,198 total reported compensation
  • DR JILL AULT (WELLNESS DIRECTOR): $142,550 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Just in time for foster youth is uniquely focused on developing a new model for durable change for transition age foster youth. One that mobilizes former foster youth staff and community volunteers to provide the consistent, authentic relationships and critical resources needed for young people to thrive and become confident, capable and connected.

What it reported doing in 2024

Connections & Scaling: The power of 600+ volunteers to build a welcoming Community for all our participants is at the heart of JITs model for lasting change. Events throughout the year Empower Parties, the JIT Family Reunion Picnic, annual Thanksgiving Dinner and My First Home for the Holidays - create opportunities to build and strengthen relationships for the long term. Plus, our innovative Coach Approach training for participants and volunteers builds community through effective communication and our JIT Network extends the JIT community online 24/7. JITs goal is to make sure every eligible youth has access to the connections they need for a sense of belonging.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.5%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 5.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.5% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $203K · 23 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $106K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.