Long Beach Community Action Partnership
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953401090
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Long Beach, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5622164600
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Neighborhood Centers
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,464,532
- Expenses
- $8,396,500
- Assets
- $5,244,719
- Liabilities
- $3,795,743
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARISA ERICKSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MARISA ERICKSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $179,905 total reported compensation
- CHAMROEUN RAY NUON (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $130,168 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 organization is committed to helping people today build their tomorrow, through essential services, youth development, local partnerships, and advocacy.
What it reported doing in 2024
Energy assistance services - for low-income households, the organization offers assistance with utility bill payments and weatherization services to improve energy efficiency as well as critical heating and cooling services to vulnerable populations during severe weather emergencies.the organization provided 7,811 households with utility bill payment assistance, and 3,439 households had energy disconnections prevented with emergency payments. The organization weatherized 682 dwellings. 294 dwellings were provided with home repairs, and 453 dwellings received healthy homes services (reduction or elimination of lead, radon, carbon monoxide and/or fire hazards or electrical issues).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 98% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 33
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.5%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- 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: 98.6%; rating input score 99; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.72; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 89.5% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $7.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $2.2M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.