Gum Moon Women's Residence
Legal name: Womens Division Christian Service Gum Moon Residence Hall
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941156357
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, United States
- Phone
- (415) 421-8827
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Residential Care & Adult Day Programs
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,202,912
- Expenses
- $2,386,109
- Assets
- $7,124,366
- Liabilities
- $3,880,216
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Selina Soo Lim (President)
- Mina Li (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Gloria Tan (Executive Dir.): $134,392 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Gum Moon’s mission is to empower women, support families, and preserve cultural heritage by providing essential services, fostering resilience, and building a strong, inclusive community in the heart of San Francisco’s Chinatown. Don't miss our upcoming event. We offer comprehensive information and referral services to newcomers in the Chinatown community, guiding individuals and families to the appropriate agencies for essential resources such as housing, healthcare, education, and social support. These services help newcomers navigate their transition into the Chinatown community with ease, ensuring they can access vital resources, build connections, and establish a stable foundation for their new lives. Please call 415-421-8827 for more information.
What it reported doing in 2024
Other Programs In 2024, Gum Moon Basic Needs and Barrier Removal grants from the SF Department of Early Childhood - First 5 San Francisco. These grants enabled us to provide basic needs assistance to San Francisco families with children ages 12 and younger. We provided 750 families with diapers and wipes, gift cards to purchase food and other basic essentials, and assistance with payments of utility bills and medical bills. In 2024, we had enrollment for the Summer School program with 54 students. The students participated in classes Monday through Thursday. In addition to the academic courses (English, Math, Science, and Social Studies), they also engaged in arts and crafts. In addition, they could select one elective course. Fridays are field trip days.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 92
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.6%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 25.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.99; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 66.6% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $134K · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.