California Mobility Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843095746
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9169551019
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,686,726
Expenses
$2,380,207
Assets
$2,621,294
Liabilities
$16,229,182

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • KELLY KAY (Director): $16,667 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 specific purpose of this corporation is to (i) promote industry standards for electric vehicles, alternative powered vehicles, shared mobility, connected vehicles, and/or autonomous vehicles (collectively "smart mobility"), (ii) research, develop, and provide information on regulatory framework and infrastructure for smart mobility, (iii) provide information and resources in connection with smart mobility, (iv) own and operate facilities to educate, promote and encourage the smart mobility industry and/or (v) promote and grow jobs, talents, and companies in the smart mobility industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

The cmc team worked hard to secure a couple of workforce development program grants from the federal and state governments. Cmc's grantscontinue to enhance and support workforce development program directly or indirectly benefiting students and trainees via internships, stipends and other job placement programs through partnerships with community-based organizations. We also designed and implemented cmc work processes that will provide value added services to the network members and partners that we work together with in meeting a common objective of creating a regional workforce development program hub.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 81% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 58.8%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -41.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.19; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.9% of revenue deployed · 58.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $17K · 15 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $339K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 59/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.