Community Alliance Against Family Abuse
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860912044
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Mesa, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 4809694024
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Violence Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $630,927
- Expenses
- $901,282
- Assets
- $491,926
- Liabilities
- $543,840
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MICHAEL HUGHES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- MICHAEL HUGHES (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $314,551 total reported compensation
- CATHERINE DYCIEWSKI (CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFIC): $171,218 total reported compensation
- DAWN NOONAN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $132,453 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Community alliance against family abuse's mission is to empower individuals, families, and communities to be free from abuse through collaboration, prevention, awareness, and support.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community alliance against family abuse (caafa) serves approximately 466 individuals each year through emergency shelter and community-based support services for those impacted by domestic and sexual violence in pinal county and eastern maricopa county. Caafa also conducts community-wide prevention and awareness programs, offering presentations and outreach to schools and local groups to reduce domestic and sexual violence.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 92% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 16
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $839.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -42.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.11; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $712K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 30 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 10 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.