Asociacion Nacional Pro Personas Mayores

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
956527300
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Pasadena, CA, USA
Phone
6265641988
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,973,282
Expenses
$9,354,680
Assets
$2,681,014
Liabilities
$2,242,768

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR CARMELA LACAYO (PRESIDENT & CEO (THRU 6/25))

Highest reported compensation

  • DR CARMELA LACAYO (PRESIDENT & CEO (THRU 6/25)): $293,197 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

At the anppm, we believe in the right of every individual to live with dignity and respect. We are dedicated to supporting low-income and minority older adults, who face unique challenges. We are committed to providing opportunities for these individuals to succeed through programs in employment, health, housing, and economic development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The senior community service employment program (scsep), funded by the us department of labor/eta. Provides part-time employment to low-income, workers who are 55 years of age and older. These individuals receive job training, new skills and the opportunity to find better permanent jobs. In the past year, anppm serviced over 100 participants. The senior environmental employment program (seep), funded by the environmental protection agency (epa), provides jobs for workers who are 66 years of age and older within the epa in support service rolls at offices throughout the united states.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.3%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.4% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $293K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.