Cal Poly Humboldt
Legal name: Cal Poly Humboldt Sponsored Programs Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 946050071
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Arcata, CA, US
- Phone
- (707) 826-3011
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- University or Technological Institute
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $61,032,919
- Expenses
- $59,409,205
- Assets
- $34,325,804
- Liabilities
- $23,539,557
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
32 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JENNIFER CAPPS (PRESIDENT, EX-OFFICIO DIRECTOR)
- KACIE FLYNN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- KERRY BYRNE (VICE PRESIDENT, FACULTY DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS JACKSON (EX-OFFICIO DIRECTOR THRU 08/24): $655,436 total reported compensation
- JENNIFER CAPPS (PRESIDENT, EX-OFFICIO DIRECTOR): $374,684 total reported compensation
- CHRISSY HOLLIDAY (EX-OFFICIO DIRECTOR): $361,166 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our primary mission is to promote and facilitate research activity throughout the cal poly humboldt community by providing professional and accessible pre and post award services.
What it reported doing in 2024
Administration of externally funded grants and contracts and various campus programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 41
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.6%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 6.7%; rating input score 7; 8th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 90.6% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $55.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $655K · 32 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.7M reported
- Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 7/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.