Contra Costa Family Justice Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474082871
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richmond, CA, USA
Phone
5109747200
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,170,054
Expenses
$6,490,928
Assets
$7,368,470
Liabilities
$2,118,543

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSUN KIM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSUN KIM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $226,385 total reported compensation
  • REINA SANDOVAL-BEVERLY (REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF CLIENTS SERVICES): $130,917 total reported compensation
  • NATALIE OLEAS (REGIONAL DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION): $115,083 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 operates five family justice centers in contra costa county: east center in antioch, central center in concord, west center in richmond, solano center in fairfield, and south center in danville. Each center is a warm and welcoming one stop center.

What it reported doing in 2024

Family justice center provides crisis support services focus on meeting immediate needs for safety, counseling, and civil legal services. Each client works with a navigator, a single and trusted point of contact who guides and connects them with all the services they need. After addressing their crisis, clients make long-term safety plans with their navigators, who connect them with services to enhance their long-term self-sufficiency and ensure they will have the resources to live free of violence. These programs include: financial self-sufficiency classes, leadership skills-building programs, math, yoga, and parenting classes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 69% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.8%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 87.6%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $141.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 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: 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: 9.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.14; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.9% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.8% of revenue deployed · 87.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $226K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $189K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.