ConnectSA
Legal name: Connect San Antonio
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 825190382
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2019–2019
- Official website data refreshed
- Aug 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2019, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- San Antonio, TX, US
- Phone
- 210-570-2105
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Transportation Systems
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $112,454
- Expenses
- $88,063
- Assets
- $24,391
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Shannon Perez (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Henry Cisneros (Chair)
- Hope Andrade (Board Member)
- Jane Macon (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
San Antonio’s population is expected to double by 2040. The purpose of SmartSA.com / SASmart.com is to be the thought leader in preparing San Antonio for this predicted growth through: – Proactive planning – Data-based decision making – Civic Engagement
What it reported doing in 2019
General Program: Engage San Antonio and Bexar county residents around multi-modal transportation needs with special emphasis on the needs of the socioeconomically disadvantaged and people living with the disabilities. As part of that work, coordinate the work of multiple public agencies in providing education to the public about possible multi-modal solutions and costs. Ultimately, we made 80 public presentations to 4,000 people, reaching far more through multiple local news stories.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.3%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 21.7%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 61.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 78.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $88K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.