California Competes

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882393598
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5105429109
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,794,142
Expenses
$2,520,719
Assets
$4,082,741
Liabilities
$148,348

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SU JIN JEZ (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • SU JIN JEZ (CEO): $284,817 total reported compensation
  • KIM BERNET (CFO/VP): $173,327 total reported compensation
  • DAVID RADWIN (SENIOR RESEARCHER): $162,049 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Established in 2011, our mission is to help transform the state's higher education system into an engine of economic opportunity that empowers all californians, particularly those from underserved communities, to achieve their full potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule ocalifornia competes advances equitable postsecondary opportunities and a just and inclusive economy by influencing systems-level change for underserved californians. In fy24, California competes made significant progress by pursuing a range of strategies, from promoting access and success for adult learners to aligning higher education with workforce needs, advancing a more agile and innovative higher education system, and contributing to coordinated policy development and implementation. In our work to advance college access and success for adults, we co-led the California alliance for student parent success, a statewide coalition to support students with dependent children. Through this coalition, we sponsored our first bill, the gains for student parents act (ab 2458) (and secured its passage in september 2024) to improve financial aid access for student parents and data collection practices so colleges can better identify the student parents they serve. In partnership with californiaattain!'s network of higher education institutions, we also conducted research that focused on identifying and removing barriers to re-enrollment for californians with some college but no credential, ensuring they can access educational opportunities and economic mobility. To strengthen workforce alignment, we facilitated strategic collaboration among community colleges in los angeles county and local county government officials, fostering a cross-sector culture to boost career readiness. Our efforts in promoting a more agile and innovative higher education for the state advanced through our California higher education policy institute for legislative staff and a series of events during the world's largest education technology conference. Through these activities, we provided research-based insights and created spaces for policymakers, leaders, and their staff to think critically on the key issues facing the state's higher education and workforce systems and share ideas for reform. Through events like this, we aim to contribute to informed decision-making towards reshaping systems to better serve californians. In the realm of coordinated policy setting and implementation, we advised the governor's office on strengthening structures to promote cohesive and effective policy implementation. Additionally, we played a pivotal role as lead advocate for and advisor to the California cradle-to-career data system (c2c). With California competes ceo actively serving on the c2c governing board as a legislative appointee, we've provided thought leadership to shape discussions for productive meetings and advanced c2c's development. We also improved holistic student support through the refinement of student housing policies and the launch of the public benefit finder for California students, our new user-friendly tool which helps students and their supporters find the resources to which they're entitled.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.3%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 79.3%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.8%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 63.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 33.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.3% of revenue deployed · 79.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $285K · 20 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.