Solibre La

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
853575126
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3105561370
Rating
34
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Energy Resources Conservation and Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$325,000
Expenses
$44,297
Assets
$280,703
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL EVELOFF (President)
  • JAMES O'SULLIVAN (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL EVELOFF (President): $12,500 total reported compensation
  • JAMES O'SULLIVAN (Vice President): $12,500 total reported compensation
  • LAURA LAKE (Treasurer): $12,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote social welfare by facilitating the purchase, installation and donation of energy-related, engery-saving or air quality related products for use in municipal facilities within the southern California area.

What it reported doing in 2020

Provide funding for solar and other energy products to municipal facilities in los angeles.improve public safety through support of police and fire departments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 14
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 86.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.34; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 84.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.