Los Angeles General Medical Center Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954192908
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2137849191
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,465,733
Expenses
$6,630,551
Assets
$4,613,164
Liabilities
$1,436,667

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROSA I SOTO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROSA I SOTO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $178,319 total reported compensation
  • HEATHER HAYS (ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR): $143,737 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To support and enhance the mission of the los angeles general medical center (formerly the lac+usc medical center) and ensure it maintains its status as a leader in medicine, education and research, and continues to provide the highest caliber of care to patients it serves.

What it reported doing in 2024

Community engagement and power-building - the foundation strategically partners with resident leaders in designing the systems and services that impact their health. Serving as the backbone for the health innovation community partnership, the foundation convenes community leaders, cbos, health system professionals, county and city representatives, and local stakeholders to develop policies, systems and community-capacity that create safer, stronger, healthier neighborhoods. The foundation is helping design the health campus of the future as a strategic partner ensuring that public investments deliver community benefit, serve as an economic driver for the region, and address our critical affordable housing shortage.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, and 30% for grants.

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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.6%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $113.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.7; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.6% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 6 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.