Calaveras Cold Case Task Force

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991761867
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Andreas, CA, USA
Phone
2097546500
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Crime, Legal Related N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$146,789
Expenses
$114,308
Assets
$282,703
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIMOTHY STURM (PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT BRIDGES (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TIMOTHY STURM (PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT BRIDGES (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • BETHANY SKEEN (TREASURER)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The calaveras cold case task forces mission is to solve cold cases. This mission is accomplished by forensic services that provide cutting-edge scientific technology and methods. Through these efforts the cctf is accomplishing the identification of unidentified human remains and missing persons and bringing justice to victims and their families.

What it reported doing in 2025

The CCTFs goal is to solve cold cases. This is primarily accomplished by reviewing evidence and funding laboratory analysis of evidence and human remains that have been unidentified for many years. Forensic services funded by the CCTF have resulted in the identification of numerous pieces of human remains that have been unidentified since they were discovered at a massive crime scene in Wilseyville CA in the 1980s. The remains consisted of pieces of bone and teeth that had been burned and crushed or were highly degraded by other means. Some public sources estimate that twenty people were victimized by the two serial killers and known victims consist of whole families including two babies. The CCTF has submitted over 150 pieces of bone and teeth from this case for specialized forensic analysis to laboratories that specialize in extracting DNA from highly degraded remains. Numerous fragments of these remains have been successfully identified since 2024. Of these several pieces of a female victim were identified and are in the process of being returned to her family. In late 2024 the team successfully identified a previously unknown victim: Reginald Reggie Frisby a black man from San Francisco CA. Reggie had never been reported missing. His family now knows he was the victim of a horrendous crime and can gain closure and say goodbye to their son and brother. His remains are also in the process of being returned to his family with dignity. The team is currently investigating a John Doe and Jane Doe DNA profile for identification. Relatives of both victims have been identified and their identities are believed to be soon discovered. The DNA was extracted from bone fragments and are likely from previously unknown victims as well. Forensic Investigative Genetic Genealogy experts are currently working to identify these individuals. In a different case partial female remains were recovered from a local lake below a bridge in 2015. This Jane Doe has remained unidentified and is believed to be the victim of homicide. The CCTF had her DNA successfully extracted and the investigation to identify her is underway. It is believed that her identity will be gained very soon. The team continues to investigate leads evaluate and analyze evidence conduct witness interviews and solve cold cases through collaborative efforts with multiple agencies through a multi-disciplinary approach. The funds received from community donations enable the work to continue.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.5%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.47; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 108.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -63% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.5% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $104K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.