California Beef Cattle Improvement Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 946102118
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2015
- Forms available
- Form 990 2015, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9164440845
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Animal Husbandry
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $18,516
- Expenses
- $12,310
- Assets
- $87,830
- Liabilities
- $1,636
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHERYL LAFRANCHI MONGINI (PRESIDENT)
- RITA MCPHEE (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- TIM CURRAN (BOARD MEMBER)
- TRACY SCHOHR (BOARD MEMBER)
- KACEY DEATLEY (BOARD MEMBER)
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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Educate and inform producers on beef cattle improvements. Foster the improvement of beef cattle in California through scientific breeding methods, management and feeding practices
What it reported doing in 2015
Give grants to schools that educate in agriculture in regards to cattle.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 33.5%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.13; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -34.5% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $500 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2013 to 2015
- 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.
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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.