Alameda County Tobacco Asset Securitization Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300033960
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5102726565
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Society Benefit N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$15,116,043
Expenses
$19,980,355
Assets
$19,071,494
Liabilities
$304,826,750

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Elisa Marquez (Board member)
  • Lena Tam (Board Member)
  • Nathan Miley (Board Member)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To assist County of Alameda, California to securitize amounts due the County from the future receipts of tobacco settlement proceeds.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization is a public benefit corporation established to assist the County of Alameda, California to securitize amounts due the County from the future receipt of tobacco settlement proceeds. In 2002, the organization purchased the rights of the County to future tobaccco settlement revenue and simultaneously sold these rights to the issuer of tobacco revenue bonds sold to the general public. Such bonds secured by the future tobacco settlement revenue.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 15.98; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.