Teenforce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272117804
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
Phone
4088273078
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,289,291
Expenses
$1,098,891
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN HOGAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TAMMY JANOSIK (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $79,187 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Teenforce is a social enterprise that helps youth gain the skills, habits and work experience to fulfill their potential. We have a particular emphasis on working with current and former foster youth. Our approach is patterned after the for-profit staffing industry, which helps develop relationships with employers and drives revenue to make us self-sustaining.

What it reported doing in 2016

We provided work readiness training and job placement services to 272 youth (ages 14 - 24) who worked 37,398 hours and earned $411,000 ($215,000 paid through teenforce and $196,000 paid directly by teenforce employers). Our earned revenues were 54% of our total operating expenses, thereby reducing our reliance on donations. Youth were also trained in workplace safety, basic employment regulations, sexual harassment and workplace etiquette.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $27.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 14.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.6% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.2% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $956K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.