Colaborativa La Milpa

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208303608
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Asheville, NC, USA
Phone
8285151230
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ethnic, Immigrant Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,123,894
Expenses
$2,681,755
Assets
$5,841,165
Liabilities
$565,417

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Angeli Sosa (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Angeli Sosa (Executive Director): $51,960 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To activate, build capacity, and support community-based organizations to to ensure their impact and sustainability.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pre-tropical storm Helene, Colaborativa La Milpa staff provided organizational development coaching, grant writing, and fiscal oversight and management to our members. After Helene, our large program and office space became a receiving and distribution hub, where all collective members collaborated with community organizations and coordinated over 800 volunteers to provide food, supplies, water, and medicine to low income areas around Buncombe County. We opened an outdoor free mercadito(market) three afternoons per week in the center of the Emma community, moving it indoors as temperatures dropped. We reached over 40,000 people with disaster relief. CLMs program, Consulta Tu Compa provided case management, resource referral and accompaniment in Spanish and English. They assisted with 380 FEMA applications post-Helene.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.8%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $66.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.5%; rating input score 97; 33rd 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: 47.7%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.18; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 32% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 26.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.8% of revenue deployed · 89.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 5 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $411K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.