The Sidewalk Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 825073158
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4156547905
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,655,434
- Expenses
- $1,523,941
- Assets
- $785,448
- Liabilities
- $123,688
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NATASHA VANDERHOOF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- NATASHA VANDERHOOF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $109,412 total reported compensation
- STACEY DEE (TREASURER): $84,238 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
We are a project-based arts & public health organization that exists to create community and wellness for those who live outdoors. Through various mediums, including art, music, film & public health, our group aims to be socially active and to empower houseless communities around the world.
What it reported doing in 2024
Tsp programs are our biggest expense, with after 2024 independent audit findings seeing us spending 95% in programs. We continued our work with unhoused people in the skid row, macarthur park and the figeroa corridor areas of los angeles. We continued to offer ssp, mat, mental health treatment, housing, emergency housing, drug testing and treatment, sti testing and treatment, HIV testing and treatment, art and music, mural painting, reproductive access, general aid, clothing, food and a safe haven to the thousands of people we served. Our two biggest programmatic expenses were our day work / job readiness stipend program, our emergency housing program. Our greatest expense is our day work / job readiness program. At tsp we offer daily cash stipends to unhoused or severely impoverished folks to work in our drop-in center where they make harm reduction kits, serve food, clean and help other members of the community get their needs met. This offers folks a chance to get back into the work force slowly but consistently. And it helps us identify who would be potential future candidates of employment at tsp. Our second biggest expense is in the form of emergency housing. Tsp works with some of the most vulnerable unhoused folk; including women fleeing intimate partner violence, sex traffic survivors, unhoused folks having just been released from the hospital and some people who are in need of a safe place while they induce mat, (medically assisted treatment).
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 92% 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
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 7.9%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 62.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 51.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 53.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $109K · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 24/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.