California Bountiful Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680426882
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9165615520
Rating
63
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$778,183
Expenses
$598,201
Assets
$1,407,614
Liabilities
$144,129

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES JOHANSON (PRESIDENT (PRIOR))
  • SHANNON DOUGLASS (PRESIDENT)
  • SHAUN CROOK (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RON PETERSON (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHANNON DOUGLASS (PRESIDENT): $251,555 total reported compensation
  • KAREN MILLS (SECRETARY): $239,538 total reported compensation
  • AMRITH GUNASEKARA (DIRECTOR OF SCIENCE AND RESEARCH): $224,265 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 advance public awareness, education, and understanding of California agriculture.

What it reported doing in 2024

Californians for smart pesticide policy (cspp) - a coalition made up of allied agricultural associations focused on educating decisionmakers on the benefits of modern agricultural tools. Its mission is to inform pesticide policies and actions in California by using the best available science and data while adhering to state regulations and statutes.

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 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 voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.9%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 96.1%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.1%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.35; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.9% of revenue deployed · 96.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $575K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $252K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.