Con Mi MADRE

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262034766
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5124674483
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$817,060
Expenses
$1,119,595
Assets
$728,558
Liabilities
$23,459

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Johanna Moya Fabregas (Former Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Johanna Moya Fabregas (Former Executive Director): $120,002 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 empower young Latinas and their mothers through educational and support services that increase preparedness, participation, and success in post-secondary education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Con Mi MADRE is unique in that it focuses on strengthening the mother-daughter bond while providing support and educational opportunities for both daughters and mothers. Con Mi MADRE's continuum programming allows participants to decide which projects and services meet their needs. Services for girls are age and grade appropriate, and topics address the social, mental, and academic barriers that prevent them from attaining their educational dreams. Services for parents work to create a family culture that values education, embraces a college degree as an achievable dream for their daughters, and supports parents in raising young Latinas. All services, activities, and materials offered by Con Mi MADRE are bilingual and presented in a culturally competent manner, honoring the girl's Hispanic heritage.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -37%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $912K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $120K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.