Genesee County Hispanic Latino Collaborative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
475491144
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Flint, MI, USA
Phone
8108748205
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$178,262
Expenses
$146,574
Assets
$86,044
Liabilities
$42,442

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SAN JUANA OLIVARES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • SAN JUANA OLIVARES (PRESIDENT)
  • ARMANDO HERNANDEZ (CHAIRPERSON)
  • MARCY GARCIA (VICE CHAIRPERSON)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To advocate for the hispanic-latino populations in the areas of education, cultural awareness and social needs. This is accomplished through providing leadership training, development opportunities by organizing.

What it reported doing in 2017

To advocate for the hispanic-latino population in genesee county to address systemic barriers to address the water crisis in the flint latino community. A total of 400 individuals were surveyed to determine the needs and 425 individuals were served.

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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.8%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.49; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 80% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 56.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 56.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $147K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.