Angels on Patrol Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275070691
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6025414529
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$414,526
Expenses
$327,399
Assets
$242,755
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MELINDA CADENA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • DEMITRIA GRIGGS (PRESIDENT)
  • JACQUI MACCONNELL (FOUNDER VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MELINDA CADENA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $78,528 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Angels on patrol gives police officers an opportunity to help families, individuals, and students beyond the official call of police duty. Together, we help move victims from crisis to stability by securing safety, providing emergent basic needs, and connection to long term community resources.

What it reported doing in 2024

In 2024, angels on patrol received an astounding 325 requests from law enforcement officers, translating into direct support for 4,108 individuals. This included 738 adults and 3,370 youth who received assistance during their most vulnerable moments. Since our founding, we have impacted 26,268 lives, a testament to the power of community and collaboration what this looks like is paying for motel rooms so victims of domestic violence and their children may be safe and leave their life of abuse. We also provide food, clothing, and hygiene items to those in need. Angels on patrol also paid for transportation, airfare, and bus fare so victims could leave their abusers. Angels on patrol continues to work with over 10 police departments across maricopa county and parts of pinal county in Arizona.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 50% for direct work, and 50% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.2%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 74.9%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.2% of revenue deployed · 74.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $245K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $79K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.