Mijente Support Committee

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
821711382
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6023415710
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,729,352
Expenses
$3,753,266
Assets
$11,122,533
Liabilities
$19,027

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARISA FRANCO (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARISA FRANCO (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $198,017 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We are latinx and chicanx people who want to see our entire community thrive, brought together by a shared consciousness of the challenges we face and a deep seated need for co-development and kinship across identity, generation, language and place. We organize people, technology and resources to achieve change.

What it reported doing in 2025

Mijente support committee (msc) is an organizing hub fighting for latinx and chicanx rights. As we grow in population numbers, so does the criminalization of our people, the lack of access to quality healthcare and education, the erosion of true democracy, and the sinking of financial opportunities. We need real, transformative change, and that requires more from us.we executed educational workshops and trainings in various topics related to latinx awareness and engagement, in collaboration with local organizational allies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 44.4%; rating input score 44
  • Program expense ratio: 76.3%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $42.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: 98.4%; rating input score 98; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 44.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.96; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 44.4% of revenue deployed · 76.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $198K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $2M reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.