La Cienega Lomod Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953024201
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2132525324
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,012,709
Expenses
$14,962
Assets
$14,713,604
Liabilities
$3,464

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TINA SMITH-BOOTH (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TINA SMITH-BOOTH (PRESIDENT): $282,820 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA KATAURA (TREASURER): $270,436 total reported compensation
  • LISETTE BELON (SECRETARY): $187,840 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 rental housing for low and moderate income families (and elderly persons) on a non-profit basis, and to provide related facilities and services especially designed to meet the physical, social and psychological needs of said families and elderly persons which will contribute to their health, security, happiness and usefulness in longer living.

What it reported doing in 2024

The corporation was formed to provide rental housing for low and moderate income families and individuals, including elderly and handicapped. The corporation shall have further general and special purposes and power to incur indebtedness and in connection therewith to issue bonds, debentures, notes or other indebtedness, to lease or purchase real and personal property available for such housing and related purposes. In 2024, la cienega lomod, inc. Provided management of housing services and earned a 22,510 management fee as partner in jordan downs phase 1b, l.p.; a 20,600 management fee as partner in jordan downs phase s2, l.p.; a 21,218 management fee, and 12,353 miscellaneous revenue as partner in jordan downs phase s3, l.p.; a 46,855 management fee and 14,071 earnings distribution as a partner in dana strand senior housing limited partnership; a 33,599 management fee and 597,750 earning distribution as a partner in harbor village housing partner lp; a 2,767 management fee and 59,037 miscellaenous revenues as a partner in del ray square senior housing l.p.; a 26,136 management fee and a 726,633 developer fee as a partner in lomod pds llc; a 8,067 management fee and a 2,150,000 developer fee as a partner in lomod rhc i llc; 143,222 in miscellanous revenues as a parter in avanath baldwin village lp; and 61,500 in miscellanous revenues as a parter in woodlake property, lp.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 43
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 983.4; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 104.3%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 34.2% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $283K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 14 filed related-organization links
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.