Oakland Literacy Coalition Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812901834
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5102803547
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Remedial Reading, Reading Encouragement

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,414,287
Expenses
$1,341,297
Assets
$797,425
Liabilities
$64,049

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Cassie Perham Resigned (Co-Executive Director)
  • Sanam Jorjani (Co-Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Cassie Perham Resigned (Co-Executive Director): $172,188 total reported compensation
  • Sanam Jorjani (Co-Executive Director): $143,818 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Oakland Literacy Coalition was founded on the belief that literacy is a fundamental right and that together, we can create the conditions for children to thrive in reading and beyond. The Oakland Literacy Coalition exists as a dedicated hub for the city's literacy efforts with the mission of working together to ensure that every Oakland child learns and loves to read.Students face many different challenges to reading achievement, both in and out of school, and these barriers cannot be fully addressed through any single program or intervention. The Oakland Literacy Coalition recognizes that a holistic approach is needed to truly create progress citywide. That's why we work as a coalition to weave together the many assets, resources, and efforts serving Oakland kids and families and enable them to learn, collaborate, and champion literacy to achieve a more powerful combined impact.

What it reported doing in 2024

Reading Everywhere: A series of programs and projects, including our Reading Everywhere Action Grants, school-based book distributions, Oakland Reads website, and partnership with the Eat. Learn. Play. Bus, to connect Oakland families with high quality, culturally affirming books and literacy resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 89% 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 - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.5%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 63.8%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 10.3%; rating input score 10; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 24th 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: 5.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.5% of revenue deployed · 63.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $855K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $172K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 10/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.