Sourcewise

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942256503
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Clara, CA, USA
Phone
(408) 350-3200, option 1
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,003,934
Expenses
$26,673,381
Assets
$9,569,685
Liabilities
$7,067,642

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jeff Tepper (President)
  • Sonya Casares (Vice President)
  • Aneliza Del Pinal (Chief Executive Offier)

Highest reported compensation

  • Aneliza Del Pinal (Chief Executive Offier): $286,194 total reported compensation
  • Dung Nguyen (VP of Finance, Risk & Compliance): $189,261 total reported compensation
  • Edith Gong (Public Authority Director): $151,542 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 provide adults and their caregivers the tools and services they need to effectively navigate their health and life options. Through a comprehensive network of resources, Sourcewise strives to educate, prepare, support, and advocate for all adults, their families, and their caregivers within Santa Clara County.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided services to elderly in Santa Clara County including in-home assistance, meals & nutritional services, day health care, transportation, respite services, insurance counseling, legal assistance, job training and placement opportunities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 45
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.2%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 13 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 93.6% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $25.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $286K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 22 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.