East Palo Center for Community Media

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201415500
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
East Palo Alto, CA, USA
Phone
6504074867
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Media, Communications Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$131,006
Expenses
$105,860
Assets
$58,291
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Henrietta J Burroughs (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Kimberly Carlton (EPACCM Boardmember)
  • Elizabeth Jackson (EPACCM Boardmember)
  • Court Skinner (EPACCM Boardmember)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Educational purpose with EPACCM's media services through which we distribute news and information of interest to the East Palo Alto community. During this year, the EPACCM carried out its mission to provide news and information to the East Palo Alto community through its three media outlets ( the EPA Today newspaper, the paper's online website and the Talking with Henrietta television show), and through its social media sites.

What it reported doing in 2024

The East Palo Alto Center for Community Media carried out its mission in hiring and paying its contract workers to provide news and information through EPACCM's three media services: the East Palo Alto Today newspaper, the paper's online website and the Talking with Henrietta television talk show.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.2%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.55; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 65.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $106K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.