Salvadoran Committee El Piche
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 954712548
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Northridge, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3236974248
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $55,405
- Expenses
- $79,666
- Assets
- $201,461
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ENOT RUBIO (President)
- JOSE INEZ DIAZ (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- ENOT RUBIO (President)
- JOSE INEZ DIAZ (Vice President)
- JORGE LAZARO (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The salvadoran committee el piche promotes the education, health and welfare of the community in el salvador and los angeles, and provides relief of poverty for the poor and underpriviledged.
What it reported doing in 2025
We continue to support the poor and underprivileged people focused on el salvador. A community center, its school construction and ongoing improvements include a medical clinic in the city of el piche, el salvador.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 53
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.3%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 41.9%; rating input score 42
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -43.8%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.53; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 60.3% of revenue deployed · 41.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $33K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.