California Black Power Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
871975655
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
2138869616
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,694,754
Expenses
$1,723,870
Assets
$4,996,027
Liabilities
$975,570

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SAMUEL CASEY (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES WOODSON (Executive Dir.): $106,750 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 change the lived conditions of Black Californians by dismantling systemic and anti-Black racism.

What it reported doing in 2024

The California Black Power Network (CBPN) is the culmination of previous California Calls Projects, The California Black Census and Redistricting HUB. CBPNs Current coalition includes nearly 40 Black led and Black serving community-based organization working together in unity and strategic collaboration and covers 13 counties across 6 regions of the State of California. CBPN engages all segments of the Black community in our work, especially focusing on those most marginalized and disproportionately impacted. CBPN hired a consulting firm to perform Strategic Communications services for the benefit of this community. CBPN and its Network Partners convened to discuss program goals, objectives, and outcomes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 53% for direct work, and 47% for grants.

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 voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 42
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.6%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.9; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 81.8% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 57.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 12 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 7 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 98.6% of revenue deployed · 96.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $107K · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $574K reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 25 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 24 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.