California Agricultural Leadership Found

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946069269
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Monterey, CA, USA
Phone
8315851030
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Agricultural Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,710,125
Expenses
$3,350,021
Assets
$29,123,675
Liabilities
$393,575

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LESA EIDMAN (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • DWIGHT L FERGUSON (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • ABBY TAYLOR SILVA (FORMER EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DWIGHT L FERGUSON (FORMER PRESIDENT & CEO): $351,523 total reported compensation
  • ABBY TAYLOR SILVA (FORMER EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $240,562 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 enhance the long-term viability of California agriculture through leadership development, which in turn benefits the people and communities that agriculture serves. We grow leaders who make a difference.

What it reported doing in 2024

Educational - to motivate and prepare men and women in agriculture for more effective leadership. Each year up to 48 fellows study business, government, economics and urban affairs in the seventeen-month leadership development program that contains both domestic and internationally-based seminars. Shorter term immersions in the issues impacting California agriculture are facilitated by calf staff, with support from alumni, through the Washington d.c. Educational fellowship program and the California educational fellowship program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 55.9%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.69; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 55.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $352K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.