California Association of Student Councils
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942764267
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Portola Valley, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8313456472
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,084,599
- Expenses
- $634,893
- Assets
- $539,339
- Liabilities
- $182,778
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kelly Wachowicz (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Kelly Wachowicz (Executive Director): $142,720 total reported compensation
- June Thompson (Founder & Former ED): $133,892 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 mission of the California Association of Student Councils is to provide leadership development for elementary, middle, and high school students and their advisors in California and across the world through peer training. Our programs emphasize authenticity, ethics, and collaborative decision-making which enhance learning outside of the classroom by fostering self-esteem and civic engagement. CASC advocates for the youth, provides an avenue for the expression on student views and empowers young people.
What it reported doing in 2024
Student Advisory Board on Legislation in Education (SABLE): CASC hosts 85 high school students at a 3 day conference in Sacramento each year, where students come together to select issues of concern, and develop policy proposals that are presented to the California State Legislature. CASC provides leadership skills training around critical thinking, policy research, group facilitation, legislation drafting, etc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 45%; rating input score 45
- Program expense ratio: 76.5%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $22.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 41.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.85; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 43.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 36.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 45% of revenue deployed · 76.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $485K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.