Cal Society for Healthcare Engineer
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941636736
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Leander, TX, USA
- Phone
- 9166928961
- Rating
- 46
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $836,645
- Expenses
- $934,067
- Assets
- $1,021,512
- Liabilities
- $73,930
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANTHONY CRAWFORD (PRESIDENT)
- SANTIAGO CHAMBERS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- NARSIMHA IRRINKI (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
- MITCHELL GREER (CENTRAL COASTAL CHAPTER PRESIDENT)
- CHUCK PEEK (CENTRAL VALLEY CHAPTER PRESIDENT)
- PAUL MANESSE (INLAND CHAPTER PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- ANTHONY CRAWFORD (PRESIDENT)
- SANTIAGO CHAMBERS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JOSEPH BROTHMAN (SECRETARY)
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 be the conduit for professional growth and opportunities for the health care environment in California.
What it reported doing in 2024
Chapter activities: chapter members meet periodically at meetings featuring speakers on topics of educational value to the health care facility engineering field and chapters hold golf tournaments and other social events to engage and build connection among its members.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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: 76
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 40
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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -25.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $261K reported
- Consistency: 10 of 19 current checks pass · 9 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesManagement column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticIndividuals column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.