Youth Leadership Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680184712
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6284009252
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,593,216
- Expenses
- $9,111,262
- Assets
- $5,752,724
- Liabilities
- $632,675
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Patricia Barahona (Chief Executive Officer)
Highest reported compensation
- Patricia Barahona (Chief Executive Officer): $234,845 total reported compensation
- Tim Haydock (Chief Development Officer): $182,569 total reported compensation
- Fahad Quirashi (Chief Program Officer): $180,336 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Yli's mission is to build communities that invest in youth and where young people and adults come together to create positive social change.
What it reported doing in 2024
Yli's three largest program areas include: Civic Engagement on Youth Commissions and in Communities - Working in partnership with civic leaders and elected officials, youth have a voice in the policy making arena. yli provides staff and training to youth programs, as well as coaching for youth to serve on governmental boards and commissions and become civically engaged.Prevention - Involving youth in creating healthy community environments that discourage access to, and use of, alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs through policy change efforts.Youth Media - Engaging and traning young people in digital media and print to tell the stories of their community.
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 93% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.9%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 77.7%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $22.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 92.5%; rating input score 92; 27th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 73.9% of revenue deployed · 77.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $235K · 17 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.