California Community Action Partnership Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461434482
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164431721
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,044,265
Expenses
$1,913,498
Assets
$1,365,877
Liabilities
$348,943

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mary Alice Escarsega-Fechner (Board President)
  • Patricia Nickols-Butler (1st Vice President)
  • Sheri Oneto (2nd Vice President)
  • Jeremy Tobias (Past President)
  • David Knight (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • David Knight (Executive Director): $184,138 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide technical assistance to antipoverty organizations and member agencies enabling these agencies to acquire federal, state, and private funds.

What it reported doing in 2024

Build the capacity and sustainability of community action through excellent training, technical assistance, education, and outreach. The specific and primary purpose are to assist low income communities by coordinating the efforts of the community action network and other nonprofit organizations with similar goals and objectives to provide for more effective utilization of public and private resources. In concert with these general purposes this corporation shall engage in developing, coordinating, researching, and disseminating information and materials directed towards the reduction of poverty.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 89
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.8%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 64.9%; rating input score 65; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90%; rating input score 90; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.4%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.2% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.8% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $184K · 11 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $297K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.