Southern California Association of Non-profit Housing Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954019655
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2134801249
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,788,185
Expenses
$2,487,670
Assets
$3,474,326
Liabilities
$891,729

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DENICE WINT (PRESIDENT)
  • VERONICA GARCIA (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALAN GREENLEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALAN GREENLEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $229,608 total reported compensation
  • JACKSON LOOP (POLICY DIRECTOR): $159,802 total reported compensation
  • ARIANNA BANKLER- JUKES (ADVOCACY DIRECTOR): $139,516 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To facilitate development of affordable homes across southern California by advancing effective public policies, sustainable financial resources, strong member organizations and beneficial partnerships. Nonprofit developers, scanph's core constituent, provide below market rate homes for low-income community members.

What it reported doing in 2025

Southern California association of non-profit housing, inc. (scanph) provides a range of services to its approximately 350 organizational and 2,100 individual members, including continuing education programs and workshops (13 in 2025, with 2,390 attendees), e-publishing a monthly newsletter, engaging in research and policy studies regarding housing programs and services, staffing network opportunities and hosting an annual housing conference, which was live in 2025, with 1,200 attendees, 91 exhibitors, 18 workshops, 1 altadena fire recovery bus tour, and 1 keynote. Scanph also engages in legislative advocacy at all levels of government. We co-sponsored and helped pass state legislation, took positions on 20 bills and state ballot measures, and submitted 45 comment letters to agencies, legislators, and the federal, state, and local governments. Scanph staff conducted 38 in-district meetings with elected officials and staff, engaged in 7 large scale advocacy campaigns, and hosted 15 voter engagement events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 28th 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: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -39.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.4; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.8%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 73.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.