Berkeley Police Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 946104546
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Berkeley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8002593372
- Rating
- 47
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Law Enforcement
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $459,496
- Expenses
- $380,646
- Assets
- $503,027
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Matthew Valle (President)
- Andres Bejarano (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Matthew Valle (President)
- Scott Castle (Director)
- Benjamin Cardoza (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide for the common welfare of members
What it reported doing in 2024
To provide representation for the membership in matters related to conditions of their employment including but not necessarily limited to employee grievances, wages, hours, working conditions and programs designed to improve the general welfare of the members. To provide for the social and recreational needs of the membership and to build and maintain group and individual strength and harmony. This activity will take the form of organized social functions. To receive, hold, and disburse gifts, bequests, device, and other funds for these purposes. This will consist of fundraising events, such as an annual charity basketball game, both to benefit the organization and to disburse charitable contributions to community groups, such as the Special Olympics. To provide both directly and through insurance legal protection and disability protection for members acting within the course and schop of theri duties as public employees.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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: 65
- 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: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 90.8%; rating input score 91; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 17.2%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 29th 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
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 10 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 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.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.