Retired Los Angeles City Employees Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237104590
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
8006784145
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$211,716
Expenses
$190,071
Assets
$440,928
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ann Seales (President)
  • Beverly Clark (1st Vice President and Communications Chair)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ann Seales (President): $13,800 total reported compensation
  • Ann Seales (Membership Chair): $12,000 total reported compensation
  • Beverly Clark (1st Vice President and Communications Chair): $9,600 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 Retired Los Angeles City Employees, Inc RLACEI exists to provide opportunities for fellowship, to promote lifelong learning, to advocate for fair benefits, to recognize the accomplishments of its members, and to strengthen the relationship between the retirees and the Los Angeles City Employees' Retirement System LACERS and the City of Los Angeles elected officials.

What it reported doing in 2025

Creation of a monthly newsletter containing Board reported information for members, published for LACERS retirees through Alive! Newspaper, a City Employee Newspaper, via our website and email, and via member meetings. This newsletter highlights pending legislation affecting members benefits, provides retirement wellness information, contains information on in-person meetings, and highlights retirees who are celebrating special occasions, such as achieving centenarian status, and provides other news relative to member retirement benefits.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 46% for direct work, and 54% for member benefits.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.5%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.2%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.32; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $190K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $14K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.