Srht Property Management Company

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954511231
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3104244086
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,771,246
Expenses
$382,166
Assets
$4,827,300
Liabilities
$734,517

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOANNE C RUSSO CORDERO (COS INTERIM CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOANNE C RUSSO CORDERO (COS INTERIM CEO): $296,040 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL ALVIDREZ (SECRETARY): $100,931 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Srht property management company preserves and operates supportive housing. The company serves the poorest and most vulnerable people in los angeles, including the homeless and those who may become homeless. The organization closed all operations in may - june 2023 and have since been working to close the organization. The company filed a petition for bankruptcy on october 29, 2024.

What it reported doing in 2024

Srht property management company engages in the management, support, administration and rental activities that are directly related to the provision of low income housing to individuals with special needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 21
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 6.9%; rating input score 7
  • Program expense ratio: 49.9%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 86.2%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.63; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 6.9% of revenue deployed · 49.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $191K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $296K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

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 7/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.