Love Like James Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831373978
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Miami, FL, USA
Phone
3052021030
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$138,827
Expenses
$36,360
Assets
$102,467
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GABRIEL PEREZ (PRESIDENT &)

People named in this filing

  • GABRIEL PEREZ (PRESIDENT &)
  • VICTORIA PEREZ (CO-TREASURER)
  • DIEGO VILLA (CO-TREASURER)

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

Underage drinking and driving awareness. The organization will raise community awareness on the issue of underage drinking and driving.

What it reported doing in 2018

Scholaship program to promote the danger of underage drinking and driving.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 22%; rating input score 22
  • Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 73.8%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.82; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 22% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $30K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 22/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.