Mission Hills Heritage

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201753499
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Historical Societies, Related Historical Activities

Reported finances

Revenue
$57,970
Expenses
$64,979
Assets
$51,226
Liabilities
$120

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Rob Jassoy (President)
  • Ken Perilli (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Rob Jassoy (President)
  • Ken Perilli (Vice President)
  • Erin Persky (Secretary)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To preserve protect and promote the historic character architecture and cultural resources of the Mission Hills community through education advocacy and community engagement.

What it reported doing in 2025

Research document prepare and submit National Nomination for Marine View Historical district; support funding of Place Economics Study on Historic Districts and Housing and local community funding.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 70% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 74.3%; rating input score 74

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -12.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.1% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.4% of revenue deployed · 74.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.