Works in New Directions Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954416649
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Encino, CA, USA
Phone
8187842926
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$395,609
Expenses
$355,121
Assets
$785,067
Liabilities
$6,423

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Albertina Morales SSS (Vice President)
  • Joeline Santiago SSS (President)

People named in this filing

  • Celeste Arbuckle SSS (Treasurer)
  • Albertina Morales SSS (Vice President)
  • Ellen Hunter SSS (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. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Organization's primary exempt purpose is to assist the poor, needy and powerless.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Organization's existing program named the Trauma Transformation Project (TTP) has been renamed and diversified into the InVision Institute and the East Oakland Alliance. The focus of these Project Movements, which was pioneered with an international team of collaborators, is still to develop and implement: 1) comprehensive trauma-centered curricula for youth-centered urban community development programs; and b) a relational, trauma-centered youth development program model that brings to life the psychology, philosophy and interventions of the training curricula.This trauma training and program model, which will eventually be implemented nationally, are being developed as supporting strategies that will offer a broad range of options to: 1) disrupt and prevent the devastating interaction between youth, violence, and sustained trauma, particularly as it influences the large health and educational disparities for youth of color; 2) intervene and work to heal the intergenerational impacts of violence and chronic trauma on youth, families and urban communities; 3) strengthen the resilience and hope that empowers young people to reach for their full and unique potential; 4) educate and influence the priorities of public policy and philanthropy on the most effective youth-centered urban community development interventions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 31
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.2%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.3% of revenue deployed · 98.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $348K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.