California Indian Museum & Cultural Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943244506
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Rosa, CA, USA
Phone
7075793004
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Museum, Museum Activities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,792,163
Expenses
$2,664,679
Assets
$4,475,313
Liabilities
$2,899,670

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR JOELY PROUDFIT (President)
  • DR CAROLYN SMITH (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • NICOLE LIM (Executive Dir.): $192,884 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTIAN GARCIA (PROJECT DIRECTOR): $108,158 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The California indian museum and cultural center was founded in 1996 with the purpose of educating the public about the history, culture, and contemporary life of California indians and to honor their contributions to civilization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education program utilizes the organization webpage and social media to inform the public of museum events, performances, new exhibits, and lectures. Education program also develops on-going distance learning and outreach to youth organizations in the surrounding communities to provide pomo language preservation events, filming and gathering oral histories. The education program produces educational products for public k-12, youth and educators and american indians. Products include, but are not limited to website, lectures, presentation curricula distance learning, digital videos and audio resources. Community resilience programs provide direct services to California tribal communities during crisis, and traditional food sovereignty including research and resources for tribal traditional food producers. 592 youths were served by the museum during 2024.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

SUPPORTED - 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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $88.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.68; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.65; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.3%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.1% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 7 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.