Voting Involvement Association Nonprofit

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810974336
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2025
Location
Irvine, CA, USA
Phone
9098966988
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Voter Education, Registration

Reported finances

Revenue
$484
Expenses
$345
Assets
$455
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jason Song (Chief Executive Officer)

People named in this filing

  • Jason Song (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Ashley Lai (Secretary)
  • Wesley Tsai (Chief Financial Officer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

This a student run organization. Nonpartisan civic education and voter engagement for students and the community through virtual meetings and in-person outreach, in order to promote informed participation in democratic process such as voter registration and civic involvement.

What it reported doing in 2025

Conducted nonpartisan Zoom sessions educating students and community members about voting rights and civic participation. Carried out door-to-door outreach providing voter information and helping residents register to vote. Trained student volunteers in civic engagement and outreach skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.7%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -21.7% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2016 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.