California Community College Association for Occupational Education

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330275208
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Irvine, CA, USA
Phone
5302288070
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,235,965
Expenses
$1,323,232
Assets
$740,354
Liabilities
$54,960

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PEDRO MENDEZ (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT CABRAL (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ANGELA CORDELL (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • GARY QUIRE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • PEDRO MENDEZ (PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT CABRAL (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ANGELA CORDELL (PRESIDENT ELECT)

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

Champion for education and workforce success.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule othe purpose of California community college association for occupational education (cccaoe) is to generate, extend, improve and foster all aspects of occupational education in the California community colleges. The organization was formed to provide expertise, representation, professional development and opportunity for communication by and between the administrators, staff, and faculty of vocational/occupational education in the California community colleges. The need for this organizational structure was based upon the complexities of administering the wide variety of vocational/occupational programs, as well as the need to share current innovations and future projections and program directions.the association sponsors two (2) statewide conferences during each year. One is held in the spring (approximately april) and the other in the fall (approximately october). They are held in the north and south. The field of career technical educators are invited to attend these conferences. The topics selected for presentation are based on the perceived needs of the field. The topics are related to activities, issues, concepts and directions of the program of vocational/occupational/career education. In addition, cccaoe provides an annual leadership academy (typically january). The intent is to develop future leaders in the field of career education. Additionally, cccaoe participates in community college advocacy work. The advocacy work is completed by including community college staff, cccaoe members, and students as part of the advocacy training providing the experience of talking/educating legislators and their staff on career education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.1%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $198K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2009 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.