Uptown Business Improvement District
Legal name: Uptown Property and Community Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464673429
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Long Beach, CA, United States
- Phone
- 5624228381
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $277,044
- Expenses
- $300,522
- Assets
- $100,596
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PASHA DARVINSHIAN (PRESIDENT)
- STEVEN NEAL (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- PASHA DARVINSHIAN (PRESIDENT)
- ISMAEL ELIAS (SEC/TREAS)
- AARON BLACKBURN (MEMBER)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To maintain the uptown area as a safe and inviting environment to promote common interest of businesses. Business Support Upkeep The Uptown Business District works diligently with our clean team to provide clean sidewalks, gutters, vacant lots and graffiti removal. The district works closely with the City of Long Beach to improve street conditions, landscaping and walkability of the district. The Uptown Business District provides several services to maintain our neighborhood. From security to cleaning services..... Join Us. We Need Your Support Today! Donate.
What it reported doing in 2025
The corporation will work efficiently to maintain the uptown area as a safe and inviting environment in order to promote the common interest of uptown businesses.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95.6%; rating input score 96
- Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: -8.5%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 95.6% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $265K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.