Alameda County Management Employees Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 830406531
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- Oakland, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8332263211
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Labor Unions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,333,388
- Expenses
- $1,023,853
- Assets
- $1,670,727
- Liabilities
- $7,340
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Angela Ball (Vice President)
- Fred Sahakian (President)
People named in this filing
- Shannon Chao (Director)
- Andrea Bodin (Director)
- Anthony Fuentes (Director)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Alameda County Management Employees Association (ACMEA) is a 501(c)(5) LaborUnion representing management classifications across Alameda County. ACMEA is therecognized collective bargaining representative for 2,000 managers who work at Alameda County, the Alameda Health System and the Alameda Superior Court. ACMEA represents members in the collective bargaining, disciplinary, and meet and confer processes. ACMEA is a non-profit, mutual benefit corporation, organized under the non-profit, mutual benefit corporation laws of the State of California.
What it reported doing in 2025
General Member Assistance (phone calls, emails, meetings 200 members assisted) General Membership Meeting: 1 meeting Board meetings (open to membership): 12 meetings Meet and Confer/Policy representation: 300 meetings impacting all members Disciplinary Representation: 25 members
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 70
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: 23.2%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.63; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 40.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $921K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $713K reported
- Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- 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.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.