Vestia

Legal name: Vestia Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943017952
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pleasant Hill, CA, US
Phone
925-655-1208
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$131,315
Expenses
$84,748
Assets
$379,252
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JUDY PIERALDE (President)

People named in this filing

  • JUDY PIERALDE (President)
  • CAROLYN HARLEY (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MICHELLE BARNABA (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of VESTIA is to provide supplemental support to at-risk individuals and families known to the Contra Costa County Employment and Human Services Department.

What it reported doing in 2024

ANGEL TREE PROGRAM: VESTIA was able to provide 348 foster children with gift cards, each valued at $50.00. Our Angel Tree program was created in 1990 to provide gifts in response to the specific wishes of children in out-of-home placement in Contra Costa County. The generous Angels are individual donors who provide these gifts and they come from agencies and corporations all over the county. Children and Family Services social workers receive the gifts while working with the children on their caseloads. Our Angel Tree program has evolved from wrapped gifts for each child, to gift cards for the children and families, to help with resources including the childs wish list as well as possible basic needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 69% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 58.3%; rating input score 58
  • Program expense ratio: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.4%; rating input score 90; 52nd 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: 35.5%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.48; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 22 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 58.3% of revenue deployed · 89.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $76K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 18 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.