People Acting in Community Together

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770090129
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
Phone
4089988001
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,123,358
Expenses
$568,288
Assets
$922,388
Liabilities
$38,910

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jon Pedigo (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ruby Ramirez (Director of Organizing): $108,150 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Mission of People Acting in Community Together, Inc. (PACT or The Organization) is to empower everyday people to create a more just community. Founded in Eastside and downtown San Jose, and incorporated in The State of California in 1985.

What it reported doing in 2025

Voter/Civic Engagement: The purpose of the Together We Vote Block Party is to provide a space for all community members to come togther for an educational, connectional, and celebratory block party. This is a non-partisan, non-lobbying event. In addition to food and family fun (such as arts and crafts, bouncy house, dj, etc.), volunteers offer assistance for voter registration, ballot initiatives, ballot translation and general ballot help, information about proposed voting initiatives (such as rank-choice voting or democracy dollars), and much more The purpose of PACT Civics Cohort is to provide civic education for members of our community for the purpose of building and sustaining a functional democracy. This cohort provides participants with the building blocks needed to build power and create change by acting together in the public sphere. In addition to providing practical tools and leadership training, we will create a sense of community, where we can engage diversity of thought and experience across race, gender, sexuality, country of origin, and religious or spiritual beliefs. The sessions follow only in San Joses civics masterclass (topics include: Government 101, Brown Act & Sunshine Policies, Parliamentary Procedures, Legislative Research and Writing, and Storytelling and Advocacy); are infused with community organizing tools (topics include: organizing cycle, self-interest, listening campaigns, public story, and cutting an issue); and include guest speakers from our Together We Vote Coalition to lead discussions on how we are putting these learnings and tools to work right now.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 55
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 38.7%; rating input score 39
  • Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $39.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 71; 71st 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49.4%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 38.7% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $429K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.