The Los Angeles Child Development Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953222295
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3104778620
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Mental Health Center

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,819
Expenses
$146,940
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY ANN ROSENFELD PSYD (Vice President)
  • ANITA SAUNDERS PHD LCSW (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANITA SAUNDERS PHD LCSW (President): $4,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The los angeles child development center (lacdc) is a non-profit organization whose mission is to provide accessible, affordable mental health services to children who could otherwise not afford them.programs lacdc at camino nuevo charter academy: in 2005, lacdc began a partnership with camino nuevo charter academy, a "mini district" of charter schools in the mc arthur park neighborhood comprising 1,300 students on three campuses, from early childhood through high school. Lacdc provides culturally competent, free mental health services to camino nuevo's low-income and uninsured students and their families. In addition our therapists and consultants support the teaching staff, administrators and resource specialists in addressing the mental health needs faced by the whole school population. The program is staffed by bi-lingual and bi-cultural mental health professionals and interns who reach a community on their home ground who have until now gone unattended. Lacdc at the culver city mid

What it reported doing in 2018

Field placement program

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.9%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7,978.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.7%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.6% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -40.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -29.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $123K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2018
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.