Wellness in Action

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261237876
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Clayton, CA, USA
Phone
9253899866
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,960
Expenses
$42,962
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • KISH RAJAN (Chairman)
  • GARRY PEARSON (VICE-CHAIR)
  • ALISON NEGRIN (Director)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Wellness city challenge is organized to mobilize and utilize the resources of the community to challenge the community's youth and seniors to healthier lifestyles through practical education, better nutrition, and physical activity.

What it reported doing in 2018

In collaboration with the administration of mt. Diablo high school and serendipity culinary academy, the wellness city challenge provided nutrition education classes and a free healthy breakfast and lunch to all participants.the goal of this project is to provide a platform for personal wellness and habit-change among the staff at mt. Diablo high school to move to better health. This is part of a long term goal to change the health of the mt. Diablo high school community, including staff, students, their families, and ultimately the entire community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.6%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 68.9%; rating input score 69

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -34.4%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -26.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.6% of revenue deployed · 68.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $30K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.