Advocates for Indigenous California Language Survival

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
721584619
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fresno, CA, USA
Phone
5597794681
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$447,194
Expenses
$434,901
Assets
$693,739
Liabilities
$2,916

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Carly Tex (Executive Dir.): $65,000 total reported compensation
  • Julian Lang (Chair): $1,311 total reported compensation
  • Stanley Rodriguez (Board Member): $750 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Advocates for Indigenous California Language Survival is to foster the restoration and revival of indigenous California languages so that they may be retained as a permanent part of the living cultures of Native California.

What it reported doing in 2024

Breath of Life Archive Institute for California Indigenous Languages and extended projects: This is our biennial event that takes place over a week at UC Berkeley in which attendees spend a week searching the archives for linguistic documentation (recordings, documents, pictures, etc.) and work with linguists to learn how to use the materials for language teaching. This past year, we had over 80 attendees during the course of the week and supported them with scholarships to cover lodging and meals at the University. This past year, we also extended the program to include supportive services through the (1) Online Breath of Life Symposium, a series of monthly presenters in online Zoom meetings, and held 4 in the fiscal year to about 20 participants per session, (2) Breath of Life Continued Group Support, a mentorship program for 4 Team Leads to receive mentorship and monthly stipends to work on language projects with their language teams, this support 4 team leads but estimated 20-30 additional members of their teams, (3) Breath of Life Cohorts Research Grant Program, which supported 5 teams with $2000 travel grants to help them return to UC Berkeley archives and continue their work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 69%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $35.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.1% of revenue deployed · 69% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $300K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $65K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.