Mobile Community Action Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630518148
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2021
Forms available
Form 990 2021
Location
Mobile, AL, USA
Phone
2514575700
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,690,432
Expenses
$21,434,017
Assets
$8,390,730
Liabilities
$6,900,411

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELIGE JONES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ELIGE JONES (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $177,331 total reported compensation
  • JANET BUCKLEY (HEAD START DIRECTOR): $109,957 total reported compensation
  • CAROLYN PATTERSON (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $91,576 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2021. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Mobile community action, inc. Strives to empower the low income population to achieve maximum potential through the provision of advocacy, education, training, employment, and emergency support services.community action changes people's lives, embodies the spirit of hope, improves communities, and makes america a better place to live. We care about the entire community, and we are dedicated to helping people help themselves and each other.

What it reported doing in 2021

Head start - early head startmobile community action, inc. (mca) head start program is funded to serve 971 low-income children ages 3-5 and 140 infants and toddlers and their families. Mca head start-early head start is the largest early childhood program in the mobile, al metropolitan area. We have a strong and solid foundation of excellence in the field of early childhood development and a proven track record of serving low-income families.more than a traditional child care, mca head start promotes school readiness by enhancing the social and cognitive development of children through the provision of educational, health, nutritional, social and comprehensive services to enrolled children and families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

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: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.1%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 95.2%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.82; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.1% of revenue deployed · 95.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $20.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $177K · 29 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2011 to 2021
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.