California Police Chiefs Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237072559
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9165056554
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,772,498
- Expenses
- $3,581,091
- Assets
- $2,898,215
- Liabilities
- $1,238,555
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
34 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tracy Avelar (President)
- Jason Salazar (1st Vice President)
- Sean Thuilliez (2nd Vice President)
- Sara Edmonds (Executive Director)
- Leslie McGill (Executive Director Emeritus)
Highest reported compensation
- Leslie McGill (Executive Director Emeritus): $188,884 total reported compensation
- Sara Edmonds (Executive Director): $122,473 total reported compensation
- Heidi Ursino (Director of Finance): $86,705 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Serving as the voice of and resource of choice for California's municipal police chiefs, the Organization's objectives are to promote and advance the science and art of police administration and crime prevention; to develop and disseminate professional administrative practices and to promote their use in the police profession; to foster police cooperation and the exchange of informaiton and experience throughout the state; to bring about the recruitment and training of qualified personal in the police profession; and to encourage the adherence of all police officers to high professional standards of conduct in strict compliance with the law enforcement officer's code of ethics.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Association provided professional development opportunities to approximately 830 members. We hosted an in-person Annual Training Symposium with 390 participants and an in-person Women Leaders in Law Enforcement Training Symposium with 1,659 participants. In addition, we conducted 16 educational and professional development training courses, including 4 summits on critical public safety topics.We published one magazine and continued to advocate for legislation designed to enhance community safety across California. To support member engagement, we launched a new online community platform. We also completed a three-year strategic planning process and introduced a new Technology Conference to address emerging issues in law enforcement.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 95% 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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.1%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 31 of 31 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 34 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $670K reported
- Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 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: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.