Southern California Burma-chinese Assoc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954407785
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-T 2023
Location
Monterey Park, CA, USA
Phone
6266253666
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,242
Expenses
$74,428
Assets
$144,861

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Eng Tan (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Eng Tan (Vice President)
  • RACHEL CHHEK (Secretary)
  • PAULTHAW (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

To grant scholarship awards. To conduct sports activities among community. To honor senior citizens. To honor parents by conducting parents's day. To grant token solacium aid and help on death of members or their familiy members. To conduct annual get together dinner.to conduct publication and worldwide distribution of alumni directory.

What it reported doing in 2025

Solacium paid on dath of members or family members

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.3%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 43.9%; rating input score 44

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.1%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.95; rating input score 65; 65th 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: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.3% of revenue deployed · 43.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $33K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.