Shelter Partnership Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953976214
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2136882188
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Homeless Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $14,114,270
- Expenses
- $10,113,141
- Assets
- $21,328,396
- Liabilities
- $296,649
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAN PERRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- RYAN MACY-HURY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- JAN PERRY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $115,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Shelter partnership, inc. Is a nonprofit organization collaboratively solving homelessness in los angeles county through policy analysis, program design, resource development, and advocacy in support of agencies and local governments that serve the homeless.
What it reported doing in 2024
Public policy/technical assistance - shelter partnership's expertise and guidance to public agencies and non-profit providers results in significant improvements to the design of systems of care and implementation of regional programs serving households who experience or are at-risk of homelessness. Shelter partnership works to prevent and end homelessness for various populations, such as older adults, people with mental illness and/or substance use issues, veterans, families, youth, people living with HIV/AIDS, and domestic violence survivors. Shelter partnership co-facilitated the work of the los angeles continuum of care board, a governance body required under the federal hearth act to oversee the funding, operations, and evaluation of the coc program locally. This work included educating board members on trends and needs in regional homelessness and how the homeless services system is performing. It also included regularconvening of work groups to set performance standards for coc-funded projects, establish funding priorities for future projects to address service gaps, and strategize about ways to improve the coc's competitiveness in the national funding competition. This work normally entails helping the los angeles homeless services authority (lahsa) to write and submit the $160+ million coc program application to the u.s. Department of housing and urban development. The policy and planning team also worked closely with lahsa to pursue and/or develop new funding opportunities benefitting homeless youth and survivors of domestic violence and human trafficking. In conjunction with lahsa, shelter partnership worked with youth with lived experience of homelessness to design and carry out a community needs assessment, including focus groups of youth and young adults, and then presented the findings to the federal government as part of a grant application under the youth homelessness demonstration program (yhdp). Shelter partnership also assisted lahsa to competitively procure new housing projects through a local request for proposals (rfp) process, which resulted in lahsa awarding its first ever continuum of care program grant benefitting survivors of human trafficking in addition to several new housing projects serving domestic violence survivors. Shelter partnership has been playing a leadership role in the development and ongoing operations of the los angeles aging policy action team (pat), a coalition of service providers, housing developers, healthcare agencies and other stakeholders. The primary goal of the pat is to collectively identify and advocate for policy change that will impact older adults who are homeless or at-risk for homelessness and to bring a unified voice to advocate for the needs of older adults at policy forums across la county. Pat members worked during the year to improve and expand the assisted living waiver program (alw) which provides assistance with activities of daily living (e.g., eating, bathing, dressing, medication management) to medi-cal eligible adults, including older adults, to divert them from intuitional placement. Pat also advocated for the local implementation of covid-19 housing resources, including non-congregate sheltering in motels, to be more accommodating to the needs of older adults. Shelter partnership, along with the corporation for supportive housing (csh), lahsa, and the united way of greater la, convened a series of workgroups of homeless services providers and senior services providers in various regions of la county to bridge the gap between the two sectors and develop pilots to address older adult homelessness. The goal of these workgroups was to develop models that could be replicated countywide.shelter partnership assisted in designing the guidelines and reviewed proposals' service plans for various public funding programs, including the los angeles county development authority's affordable rental housing program and no place like home and the California department
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as 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. Some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 78
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 68.3%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: $70.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.5%; rating input score 99; 30th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 28.3%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 68.3% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 16 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $138K reported
- Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 203 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 201 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.