Volunteer Center South Bay-harbor- Long Beach
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 952301600
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Torrance, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3102125009
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Voluntarism Promotion
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,716,473
- Expenses
- $1,422,207
- Assets
- $3,120,331
- Liabilities
- $208,178
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Dr JOSH GEZAHEGN (President & CEO)
- SANDRA MOLTALVO (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Dr JOSH GEZAHEGN (President & CEO): $129,877 total reported compensation
- SANDRA MOLTALVO (Vice President): $105,159 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Empower the community to practice empathy, spread kindness, and volunteer where care is needed most.
What it reported doing in 2024
Other program servicesoperation teddy bearoperation teddy bear is the volunteer centers volunteer-powered literacy program that provides an educational boost through a kind gift approximately 4,000 literacy bags filled with books, educational materials and wellness tools, along with a lesson in kindness, compassion, volunteering and identifying emotions to the most underserved first-graders in the south bay, harbor and long beach areas each year. The program also provides volunteers with an opportunity to help the children first-hand by preparing stem kits and items to be placed in the bags, and then interacting with students in 146 classrooms. During school visits, volunteers read an original story about kindness, facilitating a lesson about helping others, and they use the experience of receiving the schoolbag and the teddy bear to help the students identify, process and work through their emotions.durfee family scholarships scholarships are provided for up to eight college-bound students graduating from high schools in the south bay, harbor and long beach areas of los angeles. Recipients are selected based on their ability to overcome challenging circumstances while still finding time to make a positive contribution in the community. Applicants learn about the scholarship through their high schools, and awardees can use the scholarship toward the college of their choice. Funding for the program is generated through the interest from the durfee family scholarship fund. Most recently, seven scholarships at $2,000 each were provided to resilient and deserving students.
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 79% for direct work, and 21% 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. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 76
- Transparency & Controls: 91
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 62
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74.2%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 26th 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: 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.19; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 74.2% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 17 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.