California Policy Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272870463
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Tustin, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9493811491
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,245,986
- Expenses
- $3,054,136
- Assets
- $2,932,829
- Liabilities
- $1,057,020
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM SWAIM (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- WILLIAM SWAIM (CEO): $208,590 total reported compensation
- JACKSON REESE (EXEC VPSECRETARY): $202,522 total reported compensation
- LANCE CHRISTENSEN (VP GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS): $159,837 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The California policy center is an educational non-profit working for the prosperity of all californians by eliminating public-sector barriers to freedom.
What it reported doing in 2025
Research: our research team produces independent, data-driven studies that reveal the real costs of government overreach and spotlight proven solutions. They publish timely reports, reveal policy landmines, and arm reformers inside and outside the government with the credible evidence they need to win lasting change. Groundbreaking research topics include special interest spending in elections, water and energy infrastructure policy, transportation infrastructure design and implementation, union membership since the 2018 janus decision.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.2%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 75.2%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 5.9%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 22.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.2% of revenue deployed · 75.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $138K reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 3 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.