California Highway Patrol Explorer Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330917141
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Imperial, CA, USA
Phone
7603121800
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Development Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,290
Expenses
$4,002
Assets
$1,910
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Arturo Proctor (Captain)
  • Ernesto Ruedas (Sergeant)
  • Javier Amezcua (Officer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Youth EXPLORER post organization for young adults between the age of 15 - 21 focusing on Law Enforcement and Public Safety related subjects.

What it reported doing in 2018

The mission of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) EXPLORER program is to develop young men and women into responsible and productive citizens through discipline, and a commitment to serving their community. Objectives are to teach integrity, leadership, commitment, responsibility, and good citizenship by instilling an understanding and appreciation of the justice system, human relations, morality, and ethics in the field of law enforcement. In 2016, this local program has afforded approximately 20 young men and women with the ability to achieve this goal and the opportunity to explore a career with the CHP.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 78% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 57.7%; rating input score 58

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -74.8%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 80% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 29.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 57.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2014 to 2018
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.