Mountain House Muslim Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273077585
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Mountain House, CA, USA
Phone
4087221043
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Islam
Affiliation
Islam

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$788,775
Expenses
$766,494
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • SAQIB MALIK (Tresurer)
  • ASIF ALVI (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Helping and Organizing Community events and education

What it reported doing in 2023

Zakat Operation Membership Donation

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.1%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 49.5%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.1% of revenue deployed · 49.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $766K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.