The Hub for Direct Community Action

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453619466
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Cedar Ridge, CA, USA
Phone
5306151084
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$290,783
Expenses
$217,791
Assets
$134,029
Liabilities
$10,848

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Deborah Swan (Vice President)
  • Kelly Kelleher (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Laura Gerhart (Executive Dir.): $7,509 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide an affordable structure that allows individuals and groups to set-up and participate in not-for-profit programs that meet critical community and world wide needs.

What it reported doing in 2017

The community collaborations International Program deploys volunteers primarily from United States colleges and universities to provide disaster relief and to complete environmental and human service projects nationally and internationally including relief for hurricane victims and work in Central America.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 85% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.8%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.4%; rating input score 89; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.1%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.8% of revenue deployed · 83.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $183K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $8K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.