Cumacecho Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
222657737
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Paterson, NJ, USA
Phone
9737425518
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,315,362
Expenses
$8,458,776
Assets
$2,690,690
Liabilities
$630,926

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JULIE HOLLAND (PRESIDENT)
  • STEPHANIE SCHWARTZ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JESSICA PADILLA GONZALEZ (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA RAMALHO (CDO): $142,767 total reported compensation
  • JESSICA PADILLA GONZALEZ (CEO): $135,000 total reported compensation
  • LAURA PURDY (COO): $117,702 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Cumac's mission is to fight hunger and its root causes through a holistic, trauma-informed approach that provides groceries and basic necessities to families and individuals in need.

What it reported doing in 2024

Food programs - cumac offers a choice marketplace where clients can choose the food they need to make healthy meals for their families. The marketplace offers groceries to over 72,000 people annually. Cumac also offers a mobile pantry as well as home delivery. Cumac's warehouse moves, stores and sorts all of cumac's food donations for distribution to defined partners and areas of need throughout passaic county, New Jersey. In 2024, cumac moved over 3,000,000 pounds of food.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 66% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.8%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $24.14 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 64; 64th 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; 72nd 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.7%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.8% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

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: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.