The Childrens Center of the Antelope Valley

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954212759
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lancaster, CA, USA
Phone
6619491206
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Abuse, Prevention

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,085,057
Expenses
$8,863,569
Assets
$6,350,087
Liabilities
$762,736

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Hernandez (Vice President)
  • Samantha Schmitz (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Osas Otasowie (Executive Dir.): $297,840 total reported compensation
  • Luis Ramirez (Head of Service): $270,435 total reported compensation
  • Douglas Corrigan (Clinical Superviso): $203,491 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote healing of the whole person and a healthier community by providing care and services to empower children, individuals, and families to overcome life's difficulties.

What it reported doing in 2024

During FYE 2024-2025, The Children's Center of the Antelope Valley (CCAV) continued pursuing its mission to promote healing of the whole person and a healthier community by providing care and services to empower children, individuals, and families to overcome life's difficulties. A few highlights include serving over 2,000 children and youth, and successfully spreading child abuse awareness throughout the community. CCAV conducted over 10 outreach events, distributing resources and linkages, and provided over 1,000 items of informational material to the Antelope Valley community via Community Health Workers. Additional accomplishments include continued support services for children ages 11-15 through music and dance, back-to-school outreaches with distribution of over 500 backpacks, and ongoing services to justice-impacted community members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 94% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.5%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $59.74 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st 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: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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: 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: 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: 2.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.6%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.5% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $298K · 13 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $428K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.