Keiro Kikyo Home Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
332955763
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2138735700
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,065,923
Expenses
$573,900
Assets
$4,674,045
Liabilities
$76,061

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BEVERLY ITO (PRESIDENT & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • DESIREE KITAGAWA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (JOINED 2/2025))

Highest reported compensation

  • BEVERLY ITO (PRESIDENT & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $228,168 total reported compensation
  • BRAD FUJIKUNI (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $170,782 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide residential care services that enhance the quality of life of the residents, provide peace of mind to their loved ones, and reflect japanese american culture, values, and traditions.

What it reported doing in 2024

First-year activities included efforts to prepare the first keiro kikyo home location for residents. These included making modifications to the property to ensure that the residents would be safe and able to live comfortably. Activities also included filing documents with the California department of social services to secure licensing for the operations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 14
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 5%; rating input score 5
  • Program expense ratio: 33.4%; rating input score 33
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th 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: 88.7%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.14; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 5% of revenue deployed · 33.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $192K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $228K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.