Centro Hispano Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930844812
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082553018
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,618,573
Expenses
$4,419,107
Assets
$20,991,250
Liabilities
$771,403

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUZANNE JOHNSON (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • FELIPE NOBOA (PRESIDENT)
  • KAREN MENENDEZ COLLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN MENENDEZ COLLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $163,840 total reported compensation
  • ELIZABETH GARCIA HALL (DIR. OF ADMINISTRATION): $150,076 total reported compensation
  • EVELYN CRUZ (DIR. OF ESPERANZA): $122,981 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Empowering youth, strengthening families, engaging community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Workforce - workforce programming advances the business climate locally by empowering and supporting a latinx and bilingual workforce in collaboration with madison college and a diverse group of employment partners. Programming at centro (caminos) addresses workforce inequities in key industry sectors, by addressing employment, upskilling, retention, and advancement for the latinx community. Caminos began with an industry-specific track through our certified nursing assistant program and has now expanded to other pathways. These include the health care sector/emergency response, including certified peer support, and the finance industry, and growing technology sector. The work also addresses how to best cultivate wealth for trainees and community, ensuring strategies that are inclusive of immigrant families and their needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.2%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.75; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.6% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.2% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 16 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $390K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.