Point Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 841582086
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8338876462
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,129,129
- Expenses
- $7,443,481
- Assets
- $26,487,734
- Liabilities
- $625,036
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
47 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JORGE VALENCIA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JORGE VALENCIA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO): $379,030 total reported compensation
- EDWIN PELTO (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $267,666 total reported compensation
- KEVIN WRIGHT (CHIEF OF STAFF): $235,383 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Point foundation supports the educational aspirations of lgbtq+ and ally students to become impactful leaders in their lives, careers, and communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Leadership development: point provided a blend of in-person and online programming in 2024-2025. The highlight of this year's in-person programming was the 3-day national leadership conference (nlc) in Washington d.c. The nlc brought together over 100 point staff, scholars, and community members, including 85 scholars and alumni to participate in knowledge sharing panels, workshops, and field trips all centered around the theme capitalize the moment: lgbtq leadership for today & tomorrow. The nlc theme emphasizes the urgency of the moment and the importance of empowering lgbtq+ and ally leaders to make a difference in their personal and professional endeavors. Highlights from the event include panels and talks with representatives from lgbtq leaders in higher education and peer scholarship organizations. Nlc also oriented the flagship scholars to the community and provided ample opportunity to inform them of their scholarship expectations and resources. In addition to nlc, point continued our career exposure programming efforts by bringing scholars to meet in-person with corporate partners, learn about career opportunities, develop networking skills, and gather resources to support their career goals. In the fall, we brought 10 scholars to chicago to meet with corporate partners at cbre and cna and in the spring, we brought 9 scholars to New York city to meet with wells fargo and apollo global management.online programming in 2024-2025 kicked off with a panel with the national native american law students association and continued onward with five events with corporate partners cbre, sallie mae, disney, eight eleven group, and synchrony, respectively, to connect scholars to partners and career opportunities. Point also hosted a community college conference in the fall themed empower & elevate: community college student success. This virtual conference invited community college scholars to meet to with point community members and partners during the following sessions: skill building with phi theta kappa's ceo & president, dream it real road mapping with the coach foundation, and a keynote by point's board of director's co-vice chair. Lastly, we collaborated with project basta to offer a portfolio of career readiness tools and workshops to scholars, with two events specifically tailored for point scholars across awards.another key component of programming was our mentoring efforts. Research from the national mentoring research center provides evidence that affirming mentoring relationships promote positive educational outcomes for lgbtq+ and ally youth. A total of 22 volunteers were assigned as mentors to flagship and community college scholars. In aggregate, mentors had more than 120 meetings with scholars to provide personal and professional development. Group mentoring specifically focused on one of the following topics: authentic networking, career exploration, and leadership development.these opportunities had a notable impact on our scholars, equipping them with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed professionally, while also providing opportunities for authentic networking and community development. This year and every year, our priority is serving our students, enabling them to fulfill their academic goals, and becoming leaders of tomorrow.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 64% for direct work, and 36% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 95
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 86.1%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $13.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.5%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.56; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 23.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 74% of revenue deployed · 86.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 32 of 32 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $6.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $379K · 47 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $165K reported
- Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.