Associated Students Inc Csu Dominguez Hills

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
952571895
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Carson, CA, USA
Phone
3102433686
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Services, Organizations of Students

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,941,700
Expenses
$2,995,217
Assets
$3,972,198
Liabilities
$2,179,913

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EDGAR MEJIA ALEZANO (PRESIDENT)
  • JHANELLA MARTINEZ (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARCELO COWO (VICE PRESIDENT FINANCE)
  • JANNA VILLANUEVA (VICE PRESIDENT FINANCE)
  • RASHEEDAH SHAKOOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RASHEEDAH SHAKOOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $151,963 total reported compensation
  • EDGAR MEJIA ALEZANO (PRESIDENT): $16,000 total reported compensation
  • MARCELO COWO (VICE PRESIDENT FINANCE): $11,000 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 associated students, inc. Is to provide leadership opportunities for the students that will ensure responsible and effective participation in the shared governance of the campus. Asi advocates for student rights, render the official voice through which students' opinions may be expressed, and provide educational, social, and cultural activities which enhance student life at California state university, dominguez hills. We operate under the three core values of leadership, advocacy, and student growth.

What it reported doing in 2024

Associated students, inc. (asi) is primarily funded through the receipt of mandatory student fees established through referenda by a vote of the students and collected by the university at the time of registration. Asi funds various programs for the student population. Currently, portions of the student fees revenues have been designated by various student referenda for support of specific student service programs. One program is the child development center. This program provides affordable childcare and development services for children of university students, faculty, and staff. The five culture and identity centers provide programming to build community, student engagement, and academic success.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 81% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and a relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 42
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 53%; rating input score 53
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.8%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54% of revenue deployed · 53% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $152K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 24 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 37/100.