No on Measure AV - Antelope Valley Doctors Nurses and Taxpayers Against Unnecessary Taxes

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
844121740
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2136246200
Rating
31
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$233,700
Expenses
$210,178
Assets
$23,522
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Veronica Knudson (President and Director)

People named in this filing

  • Veronica Knudson (President and Director)
  • Flora Yin (Treasurer)
  • Cary Davidson (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. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the Association is to serve as a coalition of Antelope Valley businesses and medical professionals, including doctors, nurses and administrators, who support reasonable public policies to protect the local economy and ensure safe and sustainable healthcare in the Antelope Valley region. The Association opposes a bond measure that would impose additional taxes on local businesses, including private medical facilities, to fund a costly Antelope Valley Hospital expansion project that is unsuitable for the area, fails to address chronic understaffing problems at the Hospital, and could threaten the long-term viability of the Hospital.

What it reported doing in 2020

Conducted a public communications campaign to organize opposition to a bond measure that would increase taxes in the Antelope Valley Healthcare District. This campaign included literature, newspaper and digital ads, and a website to educate local residents and businesses about the economic consequences of raising parcel taxes in the District.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: Limited
  • 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: 10.1%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.