Farmworker Coordinating Council of Palm Beach County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
591830267
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lake Worth, FL, USA
Phone
5615337227
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$999,219
Expenses
$1,029,416
Assets
$2,117,454
Liabilities
$184,945

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LYNN GAROD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GAYLE ZAVALA (PRESIDENT)
  • CARLOS PEREZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARLOS PEREZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $75,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the farmworker coordinating council of palm beach county, inc is to promote self-sufficiency and improve the quality of life for migrant/seasonal farmworkers and other people in need through education, advocacy and access to services

What it reported doing in 2024

The family preservation & economic stabilization program is designed to empower clients to move from crisis to stability through ongoing support fostering client independence. The program provides a variety of services such as case management, emergency rental and utility assistance, distribution of food and clothing, transportation, financial education, referrals and other services that promote self-sufficiancy and economic stabilization. The program is based out of two offices located in lake worth and belle glade, and services are provided by case managers that are familiar to the culture and needs of this population. All case managers are english-spanish or english creole speakers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.7%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $127.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.7% of revenue deployed · 87.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $898K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 46/100.