Cabrillo College Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946121953
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Aptos, CA, USA
Phone
8314796338
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,676,831
Expenses
$5,365,616
Assets
$63,099,345
Liabilities
$2,876,265

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Matt Wetstein (President)
  • Eileen Hill (Executive DIrector)
  • Ed Newman (President)
  • Michele Bassi (Vice President)
  • Rachel Wedeen (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Matt Wetstein (President): $429,733 total reported compensation
  • Blanca Baltazar-Sabbah (Director): $309,998 total reported compensation
  • Travaris Harris (Director): $289,501 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 private support for student scholarships, emergency financial support to increase student success, innovative mentoring, and support for youth to attend college and support for academic programs and facilities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Donations to Cabrillo College Foundation are investments in the human potential of our students and the wider community we serve. The Cabrillo College Foundation helps by providing student support at every level. Faculty Innovation support faculty who innovate ways to improve the classroom experience. Cabrillo Advancement Program: From middle school and continuing through high school, CAP students receive tutoring, counseling and activities that help them see college as a real choice. Tutoring: we support peer to peer tutoring for greater student success. Student Support Services: for special populations such as veterans and former foster youth. The foundation also provides support to over 100 college programs such as engineering, nursing, visual and performing arts, athletics, and the Stroke Center.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 85% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 83
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 68.8%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $19.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 49.7%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 11.76; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of revenue deployed · 68.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $430K · 31 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.