Hispanic Health Coalition of Georgi

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752995466
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Alpharetta, GA, USA
Phone
6789236401
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$583,130
Expenses
$447,440
Assets
$884,919
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • SHIRLEY BORGHI (VICE-CHAIR)
  • DAN VARGAS (MEMBER)
  • CARLOS VEGA (MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

First accomplishment the hhcga serves as a member of the inaugural chw/promotores executive committee for the state of Georgia. The hhcga is a stakeholder/partner in this nih initiative to develop and coordinate a strategic and structured Georgia network which will impact better health outcomes, as directly relates to racial and ethnic minorities. The hhcga's impactive programs focus on the state of Georgia's socio-economically vulnerable populations, including rural areas, delivered through a multi- facted solution to these underserved constituents of our communities. It is imperative, we as stakeholders collectively address the programs necessary for better health outcomes with equity to all minority populations. The cultural and linguistic competency of our minority populations serve as the voice of our families front and center. These elements are critical for the strength, education, and health of our communities for sustainability going forward. The hhcga has developed and delivered cohesive programs, social media, awareness, promotores engagement, public health messaging, stakeholder engagement, including dph, emory university, morehouse college, cdc, hhs. Cms, nih, national stakeholders, both private and public health, community stakeholders, faith-based organizations, medical/health organizations and civic groups, to multiple partners throughout the state. The hhcga is well accomplished in the pivot of public health messaging, the importance of testing and vaccination, and presently serves on multiples state, regional and national public health and chronic disease boards and committees. The hhcga has developed full outreach programs during community health workers/promotores curriculums, webinars, help lines and comprehensive communication campaign tool kits and strategies in both english and spanish.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.3%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 73.4%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.3%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.3% of revenue deployed · 73.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $328K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $234K reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.