Los Angeles Training Consortium

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270579751
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3108361223
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$39,226
Expenses
$88,658
Assets
$67,614
Liabilities
$76,864

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jaime Zavala (President)

People named in this filing

  • Michelle Wells (Director-at-Large)
  • Charity Wang (Director-at-Large)
  • Nancy Tallerino (Secretary/Chief Financial Officer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Los Angeles Training Consortium provides training, curriculum development, coaching and consultation to its supported organizations.

What it reported doing in 2018

Training: LATC typically provides training 6 days a month, 12 months per year. The training is held at one of four locations in Los Angeles County. This involves assigning the trainers, preparing and disseminating training materials, collecting fees and collection and collating evaluation and feedback forms from trainers.

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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -126%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.14; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $64K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 39 of 39 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.