Town Hall Los Angeles

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951727673
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990 2018
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2136288141
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$694,261
Expenses
$650,588
Assets
$1,165,095
Liabilities
$17,507

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

Leadership & pay

44 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KIMBERLY MCCLEARY BLUE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIMBERLY MCCLEARY BLUE (PRESIDENT): $158,139 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To present issues that affect the los angeles community and provide a platform for the discussion of solutions from a nonpartisan point of view.

What it reported doing in 2018

Town hall los angeles (thla) is nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that serves as a gathering place for people who want to participate in the present and shape the future through open discussion. Founded in 1937, thla has hosted heads of state, corporate leaders, educators, scientists and visionaries. Thla membership reflects the broader community and their programs provide an assortment of perspectives vital to well informed citizens. Speakers and audiences interact in a true town hall format, promoting a vigorous exchange of ideas and helping participants be informed.thla goals are to expose the community to new points of view through a vigorous exchange of ideas. Participants can look a world leader or corporate mogul in the eye and ask a direct question that leads to a better understanding of timely issues.individuals may join thla at several levels of membership, each of which includes advanced notice and reduced rates to all events and admittance to the members only programs.corporations and foundations also enjoy membership opportunities. Additionally, they can make a valuable commitment to the community by becoming an underwriter or sponsor to thla's program and overall mission.thla's american heritage student program extends the message of civic involvement to a new generation, inviting area high school, college and university students to participate in thla events. Together, the topics, speakers and audiences at thla create an experience unparalleled in southern California.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.38 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 16th 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.3%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.79; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 67.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 43 of 43 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $441K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $158K · 44 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 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.