Torrance Sister City Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953079582
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Torrance, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3102072220
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $37,107
- Expenses
- $48,517
- Assets
- $144,427
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KAREN WHEELER (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- KAREN WHEELER (PRESIDENT)
- ALYSSA YAMAUCHI (VP)
- AMIEE ARREYGUE (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Promote communication, understanding, education and friendship between people of torrance and people of kashiwa, japan.
What it reported doing in 2025
Bunka sai was held in april 2025 and is our major fundraising activity each year. Funds raised from the festival are used to support our student exchange program. We send eight students and one adult leader to kashiwa, japan each july for approximately three weeks. We welcome eight students and one adult leader from kashiwa for approximately three weeks each august. We host daily activities for the visiting kashiwa students.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 78% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 56
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 62%; rating input score 62
- Program expense ratio: 45%; rating input score 45
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -30.7%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.98; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 62% of revenue deployed · 45% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $22K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- 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: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.