Kedren Health

Legal name: Kedren Community Health Centerinc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952459796
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
(855) 808-4580
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Mental Health Center

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$101,598,440
Expenses
$69,431,867
Assets
$109,846,329
Liabilities
$26,102,841

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN H GRIFFITH (PRESIDENT)
  • GREGORY POLK (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN H GRIFFITH (PRESIDENT): $619,609 total reported compensation
  • DIANE ST FLEUR (CMO): $537,115 total reported compensation
  • GUL M EBRAHIM (DIRECTOR, MEDICAL IN-PATIENT PSYCHIATRY): $511,077 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Kedren Health provides compassionate, community-based mental and primary care health services for the residents of South Los Angeles and Los Angeles County.

What it reported doing in 2024

KEDRENS PRIMARY AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CARE INTEGRATION PROJECT INTRODUCES ROBUST EVIDENCE-BASED IMPLEMENTATION MODELS TO COMBINE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES WITH PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE SERVICES. THE POPULATION OF FOCUS FALL WITHIN ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING CONSUMER CHARACTERISTICS: (A) HAVING BEEN DIAGNOSED WITH A MAJOR PSYCHIATRIC DISORDER, WITH OR WITHOUT A CO-OCCURRING DISORDER, HOMELESS OR AT IMMINENT RISK OF HOMELESSNESS; (B) FREQUENT USERS OF PSYCHIATRIC FACILITIES, SUCH AS STATE, COUNTY OR FEE-FOR-SERVICE HOSPITALS, URGENT CARE CENTERS, EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS AND INSTITUTIONS FOR MENTAL DISEASES (IMDS); AND (C) COMING OUT OF JAIL OR AT RISK OF BEING INCARCERATED. KEDRENS PRIMARY AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CARE INTEGRATION PROJECT HAS FOUR PRIMARY GOALS: 1) TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE TREATMENT SERVICES FOR PERSONS with SMI through an integrated system of co-located primary care and mental healthcare; 2) to improve health outcomes among the population of focus; 3) to reduce the cost of healthcare for persons with SMI; and 4) to reduce the frequency of expensive emergency room and urgent care visits.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.7%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 31.7%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 57.7% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $59.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $620K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.