California Academic and Research Libraries Association Carl
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942936942
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Moreno Valley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2092773163
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $16,686
- Expenses
- $20,331
- Assets
- $61,718
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RAYHEEM ESKRIDGE (President)
- SARAH FORZETTING (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- RAYHEEM ESKRIDGE (President)
- BRITTANY O'NEILL (Director)
- SARAH FORZETTING (Vice President)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide opportunities for the professional growth of its members by conducting workshops and arranging programs; to encourage the exchange of ideas and information relating to library cooperation and development; to disseminate educational information oriented to those working in academic and research libraries; and to support and, when appropriate, participate in programs of other regional and local organizations in California in order to promote and improve library service to the academic and research community.
What it reported doing in 2025
Education and research
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -21.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.04; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.