La Cocina

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593838549
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4159946908
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,892,317
Expenses
$5,916,296
Assets
$10,329,647
Liabilities
$594,508

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIKI YAMAMOTO (PRESIDENT)
  • LETICIA LANDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LETICIA LANDA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $221,723 total reported compensation
  • ANIELA VALTIERRA (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF IMPACT): $176,643 total reported compensation
  • SCOUT WOLFCAVE (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & OPERATIONS): $145,790 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Affordable commercial kitchen space and hands-on technical assistance for low-income and immigrant entrepeneurs.

What it reported doing in 2024

La cocina provides commercial kitchen space and technical assistance to low-income entrepreneurs who are launching, growing, and formalizing food businesses. We provide access to market opportunities through catering, retail product sales, and a food hall to our clients to further business skills, develop a customer base, generate family income, and support community vibrancy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.1%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 69%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.75; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.1% of revenue deployed · 69% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 17 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $230K reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.