Del Monte Manor Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941704977
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seaside, CA, USA
Phone
8313946685
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,155,183
Expenses
$173,498
Assets
$43,172,161
Liabilities
$36,235

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DARRYL CHOATES (CEO, PRESIDENT)
  • ANNALISA MITCHELL (VICE PRESIDENT, CFO, TREAS)

Highest reported compensation

  • DARRYL CHOATES (CEO, PRESIDENT): $23,486 total reported compensation
  • ANNALISA MITCHELL (VICE PRESIDENT, CFO, TREAS): $2,000 total reported compensation
  • SANDRA GRAY (SECRETARY): $2,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Provide affordable housing for very low and moderate income individuals in the city of seaside.

What it reported doing in 2024

Del monte manor's board completed working through the additional daily issues of a pandemic and the full property renovation of a $41 million dollar upgrade on the entire property, during covid 2020-2022. The board hired a consultant, emc planning of monterey, to assist the board with a feasibility study to purchase (at that time) a 40 unit low income housing project owned by al glover, a seaside developer. The board is moving forward with increasing the size of the board to seven members. We will move into acquiring or developing a new low-income project during the 2024-2025 year, as we have authorized contracting with a local realtor for a site location and or available buildings that can be converted to low-income housing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 20
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 7.1%; rating input score 7
  • Program expense ratio: 46.6%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 85%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 248.83; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 7.1% of revenue deployed · 46.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $81K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $23K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.