The Valley Economic Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954524503
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Sherman Oaks, CA, USA
Phone
8183797000
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Social Science

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,018,382
Expenses
$923,507
Assets
$1,747,376
Liabilities
$32,154

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

Leadership & pay

87 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sonya Kay Blake (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Sonya Kay Blake (President & CEO): $177,545 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Through strategic private-public collaborations made up of businesses, government, education, and community organizations, the mission is to engage and unite Valley stakeholders to raise standards of living and economic vitality across the five-city region - Burbank, Calabasas, Glendale, Los Angeles, and San Fernando - consisting of more than 160,000 businesses and over 2 million residents covering more than 400 square miles.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Alliance advances its mission through four initiative areas: 1 Economic Development: Leading Valley stakeholders in attracting new employers to the region, retaining jobs by helping companies reduce costs, assisting businesses including disadvantaged businesses to connect to free and low-cost business resources. 2 Education and Workforce Development: Strengthening local schools and fostering a well-trained workforce by working with local community colleges, universities, and employment centers, among others to connect businesses to qualified staff. 3 Livable and Sustainable Communities: Convening thought leaders on such topics as affordable housing, homelessness, environmental sustainability, access to healthcare, access to healthy food, transportation, public safety, and sanitation, among other quality of life issues that significantly impact the business environment. 4 Marketing the Valley: Promoting the benefits of working, living, visiting, and getting an education in the San Fernando Valley.

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.2%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 70%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 9.3%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.89; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.2% of revenue deployed · 70% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 85 of 85 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $646K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 87 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 13/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.