Cal State University Fullerton Alumni Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330038884
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fullerton, CA, USA
Phone
6572788434
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$261,954
Expenses
$264,652
Assets
$2,230,832
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NICHOLAS CABEZA (PRESIDENT)
  • ANTONIA CASTRO-GRAHAM (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • KATHLEEN HODGE (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM COLE (EX OFFICIO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KIM SHINER (EX OFFICIO VPUA): $313,633 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM COLE (EX OFFICIO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $221,707 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 build lifelong alumni relationships by contributing to a positive csuf image, promoting university and alumni accomplishments, providing a network of opportunities to alumni interaction, and developing economic and social benefits for our graduates.

What it reported doing in 2024

University support & alumni networking: to further alumni participation in the university and provide information through calendars, brochures, and networking functions for the interaction of alumni with other alumni and the university.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 60% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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. 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: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92%; rating input score 92; 25th 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: Fail
    • 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: -1%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.43; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 52.7%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 25 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $265K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 25 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 4 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.