Los Angeles County Facilities Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812670401
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2066188864
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Real Estate Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,647,620
Expenses
$17,314,644
Assets
$306,215,068
Liabilities
$332,266,513

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MATT CALCAVECCHIA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN FINKE (PRESIDENT)
  • MATT COONEY (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOHN FINKE (PRESIDENT): $342,334 total reported compensation
  • ERIN BIRKENKOPF (VP, SECRETARY, TREASURER): $158,166 total reported compensation
  • MATT CALCAVECCHIA (VICE PRESIDENT): $158,166 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Supporting organization to the county of los angeles, California. The organization operates in support of the county of los angeles by carrying out the following activities: (1) to assist in the erection and maintenance of public buildings, monuments, facilities, housing, or works; (2) to combat community deterioration and to carry out neighborhood revitalization and community economic development; (3) to promote social welfare and education through cooperative programs with governmental entities and charitable and other community organizations; (4) to undertake activities which lessen the burdens of government, and to carry on other charitable activities associated with the foregoing purposes as allowed by law.

What it reported doing in 2024

Undertaking certain activities in connection with the financing, construction and operation of an office building and related parking facilities to support the county of los angeles, California.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 47
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 40%; rating input score 40; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 1.9%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.69; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.09; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.1%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $342K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $2.9M reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 9 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.