More Good Days Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 842740191
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- San Clemente, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9496831895
- Rating
- 51
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $39,587
- Expenses
- $28,095
- Assets
- $87,529
- Liabilities
- $3,007
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- COLE MCDANIEL (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JULIE MCDANIEL (COO, FACILITATOR)
- DOUG BYSTRY (VICE 4PRESIDENT)
- CAILI J HACKER (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
More good days foundation through specific, intentional, practical, charitable and collaborative community based efforts, extends support to individuals and families in the acute phase of critical health challenges.
What it reported doing in 2025
General assistance
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 20
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 17.4%; rating input score 17
- Program expense ratio: 24.5%; rating input score 25
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 29%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.12; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 30.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 17.4% of revenue deployed · 24.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 25/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.