Better Business Bureau of Central California Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770228831
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fresno, CA, USA
Phone
5592228408
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,075,349
Expenses
$1,085,881
Assets
$610,172
Liabilities
$516,683

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Blair Looney (President & CEO)
  • MATTHEW M FEHLING (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Blair Looney (President & CEO): $203,695 total reported compensation
  • MATTHEW M FEHLING (President & CEO): $140,500 total reported compensation
  • CATHY BATSCH (VP OF FRESNO OP): $117,602 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide dispute resolution services to the people of Fresno, Kern, Tulare, Merced & Solano Counties using competent, well trained staff and volunteers; create awareness of appropriate dispute resolution and consumer education through community outreach; foster a culture of dispute resolution; and provide skills training in conflict resolution.

What it reported doing in 2024

The BBB Foundation provides dispute resolution services to over 14,700 people and information and/or referrals to over 65,200 people in Fresno, Kern, Tulare, Solano and Merced Counties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.2%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 67.5%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.85; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.2% of revenue deployed · 67.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $733K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $204K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.