Community Services Agency of Mountain View Los Altos and Los Altos Hills Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941422465
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Mountain View, CA, USA
Phone
6509680836
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Emergency Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,239,009
Expenses
$6,815,570
Assets
$16,680,660
Liabilities
$480,975

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAN RICH (PRESIDENT)
  • TENNY TSAI (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • TOM MYERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TOM MYERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $229,568 total reported compensation
  • SIMONE BERKOWITZ (DEV. DIRECTOR): $152,687 total reported compensation
  • JACLYN THORP (NURSE CASE MANAGER): $117,825 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization is the community's safety net, providing critical support services that preserve and promote stability, self-reliance, and dignity. The organization provides assistance to senior and needy individuals and families residing in mountain view, los altos and los altos hills.

What it reported doing in 2024

Homeless prevention services provides the core components of csa's safety net for low-income and /or homeless individuals and families in mountain view, los altos, and los altos hills. Csa provides direct financial assistance for rent, utilities, housing, dental, and eye exams. Additionally, csa's food and nutrition center offers essential and basic food items to low-income and homeless individuals and families. Over 5,000 clients were assisted with one or more of these services during the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.1%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 79.4%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 22nd 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: 99.6%; rating input score 100; 35th 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; 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: 33.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.45; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.1% of revenue deployed · 79.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $230K · 23 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.