Arden-Arcade Partnership

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
921426349
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164793687
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Reported finances

Revenue
$673,562
Expenses
$646,314
Assets
$330,017
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Chris Brocchini (Treasurer)
  • Randy Cesena (Director)
  • Jim Dorsey (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 Arden-Arcade Partnership is a Property Based Business Improvement District in the Arden-Arcade area of Sacramento County. The Organization's mission is to enhance the local business environment. The Organization serves business and property owners in the unincorporated area of Sacramento County along both sides of Arden Way between Ethan Way and Watt Avenue, along Howe Avenue between Wyda Way and Hurley Way, and parcels south of Hurley Way to the West of Howe Avenue.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, the organization carried out its mission to improve safety, cleanliness, and economic vitality within the district through its Clean and Safe program and coordinated partnerships. Maintenance services were provided approximately 80 hours per week, including litter removal, graffiti abatement, illegal dumping response, encampment remediation, and hazardous material disposal. These efforts contributed to measurable year-over-year reductions in graffiti, dumping, encampments, and hazardous waste.Security services delivered consistent daytime patrol coverage, responded to calls for service, conducted proactive business checks, and coordinated with local law enforcement. Services focused on non-emergency response, trespass enforcement with property owner authorization, and addressing quality-of-life concerns.The organization collaborated with the Sheriff's Office, Code Enforcement, and the District Attorney's Office to address public safety issues, including retail theft and nuisance activity. Regular stakeholder meetings, including Business Watch and Clean & Safe, supported communication and coordinated responses.Additional efforts included installation of district banners, beautification initiatives, and hosting a district-wide community event to increase stakeholder engagement and highlight program outcomes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 81% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 96%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: 4%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 46.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.2% of revenue deployed · 96% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $620K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $570K reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.