United Way of Ventura County Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 951945833
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Ventura, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8054856288
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Federated Giving Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,329,407
- Expenses
- $2,439,528
- Assets
- $4,286,567
- Liabilities
- $525,417
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MITCHEL SLOAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- MITCHEL SLOAN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $149,274 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To improve lives by inspiring and mobilizing the caring power and resources of our community.
What it reported doing in 2024
United to end homelessness: in an effort to combat homelessness in ventura county, the united way of ventura county launched a comprehensive united to end homelessness initiative, which includes a critical landlord engagement program. The program's focus is on increasing the housing stock available for individuals and families at risk of homelessness by connecting them with landlords who are willing to accept housing vouchers and subsidies provided by local jurisdictions and community partners. This initiative acknowledges that housing is a basic human need, yet for many individuals in ventura county, that need is increasingly difficult to meet. With actively recruiting, cultivating, and retaining a network of landlords, uwvc works to prevent homelessness and ensure the long-term stability of housing for those most in need. A central component of this program is the home safe program, launched in january 2024. This program specifically targets households with exceedingly low incomes, providing resources and support to help them avoid homelessness. During the year, the two programs combined provided assistance for 246 households. This demonstrates the effectiveness of community partnerships and landlord participation in addressing the housing crisis. These individuals and families now call ventura, oxnard, port hueneme, camarillo, thousand oaks, fillmore, santa paula, moorpark, and simi valley their homes.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, 49% for grants, and 0% for affiliated organizations.
- 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 81.5%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 91.3%; rating input score 91; 27th 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.76; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86% of revenue deployed · 81.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $149K · 21 people listed
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 5 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.