Community Working Group Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770446309
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fremont, CA, USA
Phone
5106577409
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$811,209
Expenses
$318,963
Assets
$11,574,019
Liabilities
$4,578,628

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VIVIAN WAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • VIVIAN WAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $333,500 total reported compensation
  • JOHN REIBER (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $307,134 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN NEUNER (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $159,541 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 provide housing and services for homeless and low-income individuals and families, as well as those at risk of becoming homeless, in santa clara and san mateo counties. Cwg's mission is to develop and/or acquire housing that is made available to low-income families and individuals and those who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless. Cwg achieves its goals by marshaling community resources and coordinating strategic alliances with community partners for the development and operation of housing and services, and by serving as advocates on their behalf.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 28
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 80
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 5.1%; rating input score 5
  • Program expense ratio: 45.3%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: $251.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 93; 93rd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 60.7%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 36.29; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.7%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 5.1% of revenue deployed · 45.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $144K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $334K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 23 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 5/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.