Conexion Fenix

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
853034665
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-PF 2020
Location
Lincoln City, OR, USA
Phone
5419924412
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$257,737
Expenses
$185,573
Assets
$199,711
Liabilities
$54,050

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Juana Maravilla Silva (President)
  • Tatiana Wong (Vice President)
  • Nayeli Acosta (partial year Oct 2025 Interim President)
  • Maria Eliosa (Co-Executive Director)
  • Kim Puttman (partial year Oct 2025 Co-Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Maria Eliosa (Co-Executive Director): $60,239 total reported compensation
  • Kim Puttman (partial year Oct 2025 Co-Executive Director): $14,969 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our fundamental mission is Education convinced that only through education do we promote the development of the people we target and generate new opportunities. In addition we guarantee access to education by focusing our projects on other necessary areas such as nutritional and financial education access to the education offered by the community college as well as promoting mental and emotional health in our Latin community access to information about Lincoln County services available for the Latino community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Education: We increased skills and access to resources through education supporting English classes digital literacy classes parenting classes youth programming and other health and mental health topics at our Tacita de Cafe events

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.5%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 77.8%; rating input score 78; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 40.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -42% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.4% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.5% of revenue deployed · 75.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $140K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $60K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.