California Employment Law Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942918483
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2136836203
- Rating
- 43
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $323,507
- Expenses
- $347,374
- Assets
- $89,632
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
People named in this filing
- RICHARD LOPEZ (Director)
- JENNIFER DAVIES (Director)
- JOHN BECKLEY (Director)
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
The organization's mission is to provide a forum for California employers to express viewpoints on issues affecting the work environment. Members receive up-to-date information concerning recently decided California court cases and legislation proposed and enacted relating to the impact on employers and their employees. Throughout the year, to facilitate the organization's members in staying abreast of ca legislation and ca court cases relating to employers and employees, the organization has quarterly meetings, a summer educational training meeting, an annual meeting, and often separate legislative related and special speaker meetings.
What it reported doing in 2024
Because all of the meeting were virtual via webex/zoom (audio & video), there were no expenses or income from these meetings. All of the meetings are available for all celc members to attend, as well as their invited guests. Celc provided in fiscal year 2024 the following legal & legislative educational meetings for its members: approximate number of attendees on november 20 & 21, 2024: 90 personsannual meeting topics included: (1) paga amendments; (2) protecting trade secrets; (3) settlement and sepration agreements; (4) wage & hour update; (5) artificial intelligence, et al. Several speakers each presented a different topic. Approximate number of attendees on february 27, 2025: 75 personsquarterly meeting topic included: "litigation challenging executive orders on dei presented by two partners from the orrick law firm.approximate number of attendees on march 6, 2025: 60 personsspecial meeting: legislative update report discussing 12 employment related bills presented by celc's legislative counsel. Approximate number of attendees on may 8, 2025: 80 persons quarterly meeting topic included: discussion re updates in the dei legal landscape and in private litigation presented by two partners from the o'melveny law firm.in lieu of a meeting, a status report of key bills in California as of may 30, 2025 was prepared by celc's legislative counsel. The report was circulated to approximately 360 persons. Approximate number of attendees on june 10, 2025: 105 persons summer educational training meeting topics included: (1) navigating new pay transparency policies presented by one partner from littler firm; (2) paga 2.0: practical steps in response to legislative reforms" presented by two partners from dla piper firm. Approximate number of attendees on august 7, 2025: 82 persons topic included: fake remote workers - how to troubleshoot presented by one partner from law firm of morgan lewis.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -7.4%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 23 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.