United Way of the Desert

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952783993
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
La Quinta, CA, USA
Phone
7603232731
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$525,967
Expenses
$874,422
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN E FITZGERALD III (PRESIDENT EMER)
  • JEFF HOCKER (Vice President)
  • KRIS HOPPING (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • KRISTAL GRANADOS (Executive Dir.): $118,654 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To break the cycle of poverty in the Coachella Valley through mobilizing the caring power of community.

What it reported doing in 2022

United way of the desert utilizes a largely volunteer-driven process to invest resources in programs for local people, which help more than 13,000 people throughout the coachella valley and morongo basin. We reach people in need to help solve problems for the long-term. Our efforts are focused on three areas: education, financial stability, and health. United ways funding supports 15 programs in partnership with 8 member agencies. Together with the commitment of donors and volunteers, united way is able to achieve lasting results. We use proven practices to protect our donors investment in our community and deliver the best return on each dollar to positively impact the greatest number of recipients.a) programs for financial stabilityconditions: in the coachella valley, nearly 50% of residents live at or below 200% federal poverty level and struggle to meet their basic needs. United way of the desert provides resources for programs that address critical needs such as food, clothing, and shelter for our most at-risk residents, including those financially impacted by covid-19. These programs help keep families in their homes and on their way to recovery by allowing them to retain more of their incomes.results: nearly 4,000 individuals were served for the year in the area of income stability. The programs receiving funding for this area include rental and utility assistance, shelter for homeless, healthcare programs for disabled and elderly, food distribution, and cancer patient treatment.b) programs for educationconditions: more than 60% of children entering kindergarten have not had any form of early education. With 34% of children living in poverty, and more than 80% of children in the coachella valley qualifying for free or reduced cost lunch, many children do not receive an educational foundation at home due to a familys financial constraint to pay for quality pre-k or after-school care. Programs are needed to provide safe and effective environments for children to learn and develop. After-school care and programs further assist with a childs educational foundation, helping to provide a safe and secure place for them and keeping them engaged in continual learning both emotionally and educationally. Results: united ways funding for educational programs served approximately 6,100 youth in accredited child care and after-school care; early literacy support; education and career development; life skills; character and leadership development; and citizenship programs.c) programs for healthconditions: one-third of coachella valley residents are obese and at risk for developing chronic and life-threatening illness. In addition, our most underserved residents, including seniors, disables adults, and low-income families lack access to healthcare necessary to achieve high quality of life. Results: united way funding of health care served approximately 1,100 individuals for mental health counseling for children; case work and counseling for victims of child abuse; and nutrition education for youth.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -66.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $674K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.