National Elder Fraud Coordination Center Limited

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
931421130
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oceanside, CA, USA
Phone
3038415749
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$651,940
Expenses
$602,454
Assets
$1,069,486
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Finta (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • David Finta (CEO): $233,334 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The specific purpose of this corporation is to create a public private partnership designed to combat Elder Fraud. Law enforcement is constrained by competing priorities jurisdictional challenges and lack of available resources to address the avalanche of fraud that is largely perpetrated by transnational organized crime rings. Private companies possess valuable data but there is no central repository to link it with other data sets.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization established a public private partnership to combat elder fraud facilitating collaboration between law enforcement and private companies. It developed data-sharing protocols to identify and track fraudulent activity supported victims through outreach and education and increased public awareness of emerging fraud schemes. These efforts strengthened coordination across jurisdictions improved access to critical data and enhanced the communitys ability to prevent and respond to fraud targeting older adults.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $54.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 7.6%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -44% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89% of revenue deployed · 96% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $578K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $233K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.