Lafh Phase I Qalicb Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474960359
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
North Hollywood, CA, USA
Phone
8189824091
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,560
Expenses
$191,585
Assets
$6,361,800
Liabilities
$3,750

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHANIE KLASKY-GAMER (Chairman): $331,195 total reported compensation
  • TOI CHISOM (Secretary): $238,035 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the organization is to own the south campus of l.a. Family housing, a real estate property leased to l.a. Family housing for the purpose of operatingtwo essential programs: bridge housing (bh) and the family solutions center (fsc).

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2015, la family housing began phase i of its campus development withthe rehabilitation of the south campus at 7817 lankershim blvd. In northhollywood, California. This property (formerly known as the sydneym. Irmas transitional living center "tlc", which was used as afamily shelter) was converted to three primary uses: bridge housingfor up to 250 single adults, bridge/crisis housing for 12 homelessfamilies, and the family solution center serving as the region ces servicehome for intake and assessment, housing placement, and housing stabilityservices for homeless families throughout the region. Construction andrehabilitation of the south campus property was completed in 2017.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98%; rating input score 98
  • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -5,281.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 33.21; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.9% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.4% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $188K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $331K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.