La-mas Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383886677
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2134650410
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Engineering and Technology

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$899,335
Expenses
$646,587
Assets
$1,017,912
Liabilities
$402,985

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Betty Avila (President)
  • Helen Leung (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Helen Leung (Executive Director): $105,657 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

LA Ms work involves a combination of community-building popular education capacity-building and cooperative development. By shifting mindsets and behaviors toward community care and by demonstrating alternative economic and housing models we are building a hyperlocal version of the world we want to see -- in real time with community at the front and center. Through nurturing a culture of cooperation and solidarity we also cultivate stability and self-determination for working class communities of color in Northeast LA.

What it reported doing in 2024

Core Programs: 1 Community Housing - We focus on creating affordable stable and community-stewarded housing addressing the root causes of displacement and fostering long-term community resilience in Northeast LA. 2 Community Economies - We build a local sharing economy with community members and allies through regular practices of economic solidarity - resource exchange mutual aid and local spending.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% 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.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.6%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.1%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.57; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.6% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $500K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $106K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 44 of 44 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.