Middle Georgia Community Action Agency

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581192477
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2021
Location
Warner Robins, GA, USA
Phone
4789224464
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$25,372,550
Expenses
$25,547,024
Assets
$13,440,310
Liabilities
$10,379,006

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TAMMY SOSEBEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • TAMMY SOSEBEE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $209,310 total reported compensation
  • LESLIE J ADAMS (FORMER FINANCIAL OFFICER): $129,308 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 agency is to empower low-income individuals and families in middle Georgia by providing comprehensive services that address immediate needs and promote long-term self-sufficiency in collaboration with community partners.

What it reported doing in 2024

Child nutrition- to supplement breakfast, lunch, and snacks for head start children. 5311 transportation- to provide fare based, demand response, rural public transportation. Neighborhood service centers- provide various programs designed to improve client household's overall quality of life. Child access - to support and facilitate access and visitation by non custodtial parents with their children. Weatherization programs- provided to reduce heating and cooling costa for lowincome families, particularly for the elderly, people with disabilities, and children by improving the energy efficiency for their homes, while ensuring their health and safety. Other education programs - to supplement the head start program. Emergency assistance programs - to provide assistance with energy and rental payments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 87% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.7%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 89.1%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.77; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.7% of revenue deployed · 89.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $22.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.