Los Angeles Christian Health Centers

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954315734
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2138931960
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Ambulatory Health Center, Community Clinic
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$23,115,201
Expenses
$35,712,136
Assets
$11,324,892
Liabilities
$15,009,359

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BETTINA LEWIS (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • BETTINA LEWIS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $222,163 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN LEE (PHYSICIAN): $212,493 total reported compensation
  • KALAKI CLARKE (PHYSICIAN): $208,407 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 los angeles christian health centers is to follow christ by loving and serving our neighbors through the provision of comprehensive quality healthcare. Our vision is the healing and restoration of homeless and underserved communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided primary health care services to approximately 9,576 unique patients over 82,831 medical, behavioral health, dental, optometry and care coordination visits. Our comprehensive services included primary and preventive services, chronic disease management, HIV care, health screening, radiology, laboratory services, covid testing and vaccination; behavioral health screening, assessment, and counseling; substance use services; dental examinations, x-rays, teeth cleaning, filling cavities, tooth extractions, and dentures; eye exams, screening for retinal disease and glaucoma, provision of glasses and corrective lenses. Also provided care coordination, case management and referral services to increase patient engagement in their personal healthcare and health outcomes and to house homeless persons.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 71% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.3%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -54.5%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.33; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $32.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 19 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 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.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.