The Victor Pineda Foundation Dba World Enabled
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510538978
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2016
- Location
- Berkeley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3104674556
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Private Grantmaking Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $677,909
- Expenses
- $736,694
- Assets
- $189,457
- Liabilities
- $145,740
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- VICTOR PINEDA (President)
People named in this filing
- VICTOR PINEDA (President)
- MEGAN BENTLEY (Secretary)
- ABRIE LEE (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Educational resources for disabled persons.
What it reported doing in 2023
THE FOUNDATION PROVIDES EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES FOR DISABLED PERSONS AND DEVELOPS EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS IN MULTIPLE FORMATS IN CONNECTION WITH THE NEW URBAN AGENDA, THE SDG, UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES AND UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN'S FUND (UNICEF) PROGRAM: "Its About Ability". THE FOUNDATION ALSO developed web-based educational resources in support of the American's with Disabilities Act. Additional self-advocacy training was provided through workshops, trainings, and conferences in the US and abroad. The Foundation engaged youth with and without disabilities to develop inclusive community action plans and provided them with mentorship and resources to bring their plans to life. The Foundation continues to reach students and educators and advocates for systems change in an effort to improve outcomes for adults and youth with disabilities. The Foundation provided training and technical assistance on universal design, technology and disability inclusive policy to advocates and government officials.The Foundation participated in the globally recognized Habitat III conference by mobilizing international effort to ensure that disability-specific language and a standalone paragraph on disability was included in the outcome document of the Habitat III conference on the negotiations with member states and coordinated trainings on the Habitat III process with civil society. This impacted the outcome of Habitat III meetings by building a coalition that successfully inserted 15 references on disability inclusive urban development in the outcome documents. The foundation also partnered with G3ict in organizing roundtable events in Quito, Barcelona, and London, and focus groups events in California and New York that gathers major stakeholders in different industries that highly and directly impacts the use of technology in helping persons with disabilities and older persons.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 70
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 65
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.1%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 70%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: -8.7%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 76.1% of revenue deployed · 70% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $516K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2018 to 2023
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.