California Emerging Technology Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 205184429
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Concord, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4157442383
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,938,233
- Expenses
- $10,441,474
- Assets
- $12,139,308
- Liabilities
- $241,361
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Sunne Wright McPeak (President and CEO)
- Raquel Cinat (Associate Vice President)
- Alana O'Brien (Vice President Operations)
Highest reported compensation
- Sunne Wright McPeak (President and CEO): $495,413 total reported compensation
- Agustin Urgiles (School2Home Executive Mana): $247,914 total reported compensation
- Raquel Cinat (Associate Vice President): $226,830 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 leadership statewide to minimize the Digital Divide by accelerating the deployment and adoption of broadband and advanced communications to unserved and underserved communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
CETF completed the development of the CETF Digital Equity Ecosystem as a major asset: integrated to optimize impact of each component, driven by Direct Notification; achieved the most cost-effective system of services operating at scale statewide; and recognized by partners as a valuable asset with increasing references in partner proposals. The CETF Digital Equity Ecosystem is operated as a seamless continuum of supports for CBOs so they can focus on outreach and delivery of services in-language and in-culture to reach the most low-income households. The following are the CETF assets and resources to support the Digital Equity Ecosystem:- Working Relationships Statewide with Spectrum of Community, Public, and Private Partners- Operations at Scale for Cost-Effective Implementation and Grant Management- Ability to Partner with New CBOs as Additional Trusted Messengers to Build Local Capacity- Understanding and Experience in Planning and Managing Direct Notification- Tool Kit and Templates for Affordable Internet Service Offers in Multiple Languages- Get Connected Call Center with Ability to Accommodate Multiple Communications Channels- Curricula to Train Digital Navigators and Coach to Success- Digital Literacy Training Curricula and Facilitator Guides (UNESCO Framework 6 Elements)- Digital Literacy Skills Proficiency Self-Assessment for Common Metrics- Online Learning Platform with Curriculum Content and Self-Assessment Process- Experience in Organizing and Supporting In-Person Enrollment Events Statewide- Knowledge in Public Awareness Advertising in Community and Ethnic Media Channels- Established Strategies to Generate Revenue Streams for Computing Devices- Data Analysis to Benchmark Costs and Project Possible Impacts- Deep Experience in Integrating and Managing All Components of Digital Equity Ecosystem Enrolled 13,709 low-income Unconnected Households in affordable Internet service: (1) 12,239 Low-income Households statewide through a California Public Utilities Commission (CASF) California Advanced Services Fund (CASF) Call Center Grant; (2) 220 Low-Income Households in 5 AB617 Communities (West Oakland, East Oakland, Richmond, South Sacramento, Stockton) through a CPUC CASF Grant for 5 AB617 Communities; and (3) 1,250 Low-income Households through the Riverside County Partnership. Delivered Digital Literacy Training to 750 Low-Income Households: (1) 600 Low-Income Households in 3 Regions (Pacific Coast, Southeast Los Angeles County, and Riverside County) supported by CPUC CASF Grants; (2) 100 Low-Income Households in Silicon Valley and Central Coast supported by an AT&T Foundation Grant; and (3) 50 Low-Income Households in Silicon Valley supported by Kaiser Permanente Foundation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 68% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 59% for direct work, and 41% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 76
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 94.9%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th 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: -165.1%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.2%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $9.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $495K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.1M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 68 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 54 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.