California Manufacturers and Technology Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951461050
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164983310
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,005,915
Expenses
$3,296,081
Assets
$5,693,914
Liabilities
$5,275,116

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

Leadership & pay

48 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lance Hastings (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lance Hastings (President & CEO): $441,025 total reported compensation
  • Ananda Rochita (VP Communications): $164,927 total reported compensation
  • Robert Spiegel (VP Govt. Relations): $163,589 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 Manufacturers & Technology Association works to improve and enhance a strong business climate for Californias 30,000 manufacturing, processing and technology-based companies. Since 1918, CMTA has worked with the state government to develop balanced laws, effective regulations and sound public policies to stimulate economic growth and create new jobs while safeguarding the states environmental resources. CMTA represents 400 businesses from the entire manufacturing community an economic sector that generates more than $300 billion every year and employs more than 1.3 million Californians.

What it reported doing in 2024

Restricted funds: the organization maintains a number of restrictedfunds including:1.) energy fund: for professional services rendered in connection with utility rate negotiations2.) economic feasibility: for regulatory matters related to ensuring effective cost/benefit analysis is completed on rules and regulations3.) relevance in education and learning fund: provide a more well-rounded education for students through rigorous academic and vocational and technical courses4.) nera: for consulting services5.) wildfire: for matters related to wildfire impacts on energy/electricity6.) industry energy project: for a collaborative pan-industry effort to focus public policy attention on matters relating to affordability and reliability of energy in california7.) cap/trade 2020: for a collaborative effort to raise awareness on air quality issues in california8.) get real: for matters relating to a coalition of businessess working to promote career technical eduction in schools in California

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% 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: 85
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 60

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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.73; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 45 of 45 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $441K · 48 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $676K reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.