South Central Scholars Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202820261
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3108331670
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,075,767
Expenses
$2,095,388
Assets
$1,713,576
Liabilities
$36,670

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN MASSEY (PRESIDENT)
  • JOEY SHANAHAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOEY SHANAHAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $135,000 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINA PIRANIO (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS): $72,822 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of South Central Scholars is to help highly motivated, underserved students break the cycle of marginalization and reach success in college, career, and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2016

The organization provides college access and success support to low-income students from inner city communities in los angeles. Programs include college outreach, scholarships, mentoring, job and internship placement, and professional/academic developments workshops and seminars. The organization's scholarships are intended to close shortfalls between the amount of money offered in the financial package from a university (grants, loans, and work study) and the actual cost of a student's college education. In some cases, these shortfalls would prevent students from attending college altogether. Scholarships range between $1,000 to $3,000 per scholar, and are renewable for up to 6 years. Scs has an additional budget for stipends to students to participate for the following uses: airfare and travel expenses, internship stipends, study abroad stipends, and graduate school preparation classes and test fees (mcat, lsat, gre, etc.).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 71st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $135K · 23 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.