Mental Health Association of San Francisco

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941218623
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4153419505
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,871,811
Expenses
$22,099,979
Assets
$3,847,348
Liabilities
$2,469,185

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAR SALAZAR (President & CEO)
  • DAVID LEWIS (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • MAR SALAZAR (President & CEO): $272,609 total reported compensation
  • TIM LEWANDOWSKI (COO): $53,576 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 mental health association of san francisco is to cultivate peer leadership, build community, and advance social justice in mental health.

What it reported doing in 2024

County of marin triage: the overall goal of mhasf? S county of marin triage program is to address and mitigate mental health crises through peer support and assistance in collaboration with other mental health and systems providers in marin county. We strive to give mental health consumers warm, strength-based, timely and thorough support to reduce instances of involuntary hospitalization and promote recovery. We strive to: 1.ensure services meet the needs dentified of consumers and promote recovery and self-empowerment 2.ensure that services are respectful of and are sensitive to the ethnic/cultural context and history of the consumer and their support system 3.ensure consumers are involved to the greatest extent possible in all decisions affecting services 4.provide services in community settings and in the context of the consumers? Culture 5.promote collaboration among consumers, support systems, mental health providers, health care providers, justice system personnel, school personnel and other agencies 6. Develop meaningful process for evaluation of services. The program provides quality, peer-based mental health support and advocacy. Trained peer providers respond to those identified as experiencing a mental health crisis and will provide advocacy, support, and assist with the navigation of appropriate services as part of a collaborative effort with other service providers. Services will be provided to individuals who identify as being in crisis and/or their significant support person.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 92.4%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $249.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.4% of revenue deployed · 92.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $20.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $273K · 12 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $329K reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.