Sonoma Valley Mentoring Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680429128
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Sonoma, CA, USA
Phone
7079381990
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,671,352
Expenses
$823,313
Assets
$1,760,832
Liabilities
$11,764

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Susan H Gallo (Executive Dir.): $122,500 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We work towards creating a community where all youth develop healthy, strong relationships and have access to experiences and opportunities that promote their growth, allowing them to reach their full potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

School Based Mentoring - Sonoma Valley Mentoring Alliance maintained eight mentoring centers located on public school campuses in the Sonoma Valley Unified School District (4 elementary schools, 2 middle schools and 1 high school). These centers provide oversight and assistance to our one-on-one mentoring matches between an adult mentor and a youth mentee (grades K-12) during the nine months of the school year. In the year ended June 30, 2025, these centers provided services to approximately 300 mentor-mentee matches.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30.9%; rating input score 31
  • Program expense ratio: 57.7%; rating input score 58
  • Fundraising efficiency: $42.37 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th 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; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 50.7%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.14; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.9%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30.9% of revenue deployed · 57.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $475K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $122K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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 31/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.