Community Action Partnership of Madera County, Inc.
Legal name: Community Action Partnership of Madera County Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941612823
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Madera, CA, US
- Phone
- (559) 673-9173
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $38,355,976
- Expenses
- $38,296,173
- Assets
- $29,757,399
- Liabilities
- $26,757,067
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- MATTIE MENDEZ (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $267,179 total reported compensation
- MARTIZA GOMEZ-ZARAGOSA (HEAD START DIR): $158,437 total reported compensation
- IRENE YANG (HR DIRECTOR): $156,805 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 address the local needs of individuals and families who live in poverty.
What it reported doing in 2024
Other programs including the following:*rape/sexual assault services: victim services provides help for survivors of sexualassault regardless of how long ago it happened or whether or not the assault wasreported. Services include a confidential 24-hour crisis line and counseling.*child forensic interview team: provides multi-disciplinary team to conductinterview of alleged sexual abuse with children. Provided 88 interviews.*victim & witness services: victim services strives to reduce the trauma of a crimeby empowering and assisting crime victims, witnesses, and significant others torestructure their lives through advocacy, support, information, and referrals.*martha diaz domestic violence & transitional housing programs: martha diaz willprovide up to 30 days of emergency shelter to women and children who are inimmediate danger of domestic violence. The exact location of the 18-bed shelter iskept confidential to protect the safety of the residents. All residents receivelodging, food, and clothing. There were 33 individuals served. The transitionalhousing program provides housing and continued case management for up to 18 monthsto women and children following the emergency shelter stay. Approximately 27individuals were served.*strengthening families program: this program instructs parents and children on howto function as an improved family unit. It teaches families to interact with eachother in a thoughtful fashion. Approximately 165 families secured training.*housing provided on a non-emergency basis: there were approximately 160 individualswho were provided housing for those with mental health conditions. This housing wasin addition to those receiving emergency housing.*emergency food & shelter programs: provide housing assistance to qualified familiesof madera county. Approximately 34 individuals were provided with rentalassistance and there were 376 outreach services. There were 246 individualsprovided food and 84 individuals with emergency shelter.energy programs:*the community services department runs the low-income home energy assistanceprogram (liheap). Liheap applies a credit to pg&e and propane accounts, and helpspay for wood for applicants who qualify.*weatherization also falls under the community services department. Theweatherization service enables families to permanently reduce their energy bills bymaking their homes more energy efficient.
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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.9%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 66th 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: 0.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.9; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 91.9% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $35.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 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: 5 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.
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.