California Association for Local Economic Development
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942645503
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9164488252
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,426,562
- Expenses
- $1,512,586
- Assets
- $1,021,649
- Liabilities
- $281,469
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GURBAX SAHOTA (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- GURBAX SAHOTA (PRESIDENT & CEO): $287,166 total reported compensation
- MICHELLE STEPHENS (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $142,501 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The California assoication for local economic development (caled) is the premier statewide professional economic development organization dedicated to advancing its memberss ability to achieve excellence in delivering economic development services to their communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Caled breaks its activities into five core programs: education & training, technical assistance to communities, policy & advocacy, information & communications, and corporate activity. All of these are part of the helping the members do the best job they can in providing economic development service to the state and respective communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 69% 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: 84
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 60
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: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 28.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $287K · 21 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 13 of 31 current checks pass · 18 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompDisqualPersons column 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 DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther 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 Interest 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 OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PensionPlanContributions 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 — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.