California Cattlemen's Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680352085
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$455,779
Expenses
$406,431
Assets
$171,123
Liabilities
$49,565

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JILL HEELY (MEMBER)
  • PAT KIRBY (CHAIR)
  • NATALIE KOOPMANN (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support and engage in educational, legal, charitable, and research activities related to livestock in California.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 90% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.2%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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; 63rd 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: 10.8%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 25% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.2% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $406K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.