Monument Impact
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 943370919
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Concord, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9256828248
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Employment Procurement Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,263,498
- Expenses
- $3,703,222
- Assets
- $4,464,907
- Liabilities
- $422,650
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- JUDITH ORTIZ (Executive Dir.): $137,363 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to serve as an advocate and resource in contra costa county that guides, educates, and connects low-income communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Elevate concord - in partnership with the city of concord, monument impact (mi) received $1.5m in arpa funding to support elevate concord, a two-year program. Mi also received other funding from partners, the latino community foundation, y&h soda, and community financial resources. The program stabilized 120 families by providing $500 for 12 months + $2500 at the start. Mi partnered with uptogether to help randomly select the families based on specific criteria to ensure fairness and transparency and process the monthly payments. The required program criteria were as follows: single parents who are concord residents have at least one child under 12 years old earns $55,000 or less annually we are working with dr. Rosa maria sternberg on a two (2) year evaluation, which includes both qualitative and quantitative data collection, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the program's effectiveness. The surveys are sent quarterly, and families receive $35 for their responses.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 93
- Sustainability: 59
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.7%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $30.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th 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: NotApplicable
- 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: 13.1%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 29.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 73.7% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $3.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $137K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.