California Psychological Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941634291
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9162867979
Rating
41
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,275,659
Expenses
$1,453,077
Assets
$2,044,058
Liabilities
$1,227,197

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Parker (CEO)
  • Melanie Chinchilla (President)
  • David Hindman (Past President)
  • Joshua Heitzmann (President Elect)

Highest reported compensation

  • Scott Parker (CEO): $196,833 total reported compensation
  • Elizabeth Winkleman (Dir of Profess Aff): $105,386 total reported compensation
  • Tom Marx (CFO): $82,762 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

CPA supports our members professional interests, promotes and protects the science and practice of psychology, and advocates for the health and welfare of all Californians.

What it reported doing in 2024

Governance Program CPA has a Board of Directors that has nine (9) voting members (10 on alternate years when there is a Treasurer-elect). All members of the Board of Directors are elected by the full CPA membership, except for the Student Member Seat which is filled by the chair of our student organization.The Board establishes policy for the Association and, according to the CPA bylaws, has the responsibility for actively overseeing the work of the Association to ensure that the Association is adhering to state and federal laws relative to non-profit corporations, corporate ethics, and anti-trust requirements. The Board typically holds several in-person meetings per year and telephone or videoconference meetings monthly. This was modified during the pandemic, and all our meetings have been virtual. During an annual meeting at our convention each year CPA members receive an update on the activities of the association and the CEO and the Board members present are available to respond to questions from the membership regarding the activities of the Association. There are six standing committees of the Board, as well as other committees and task forces that are established as needed for the work of the organization. The Board oversees the work of all committees and task forces. The work of the committees encompasses overseeing the finances of the Association, providing ethical consultation to our members, developing educational opportunities such as continuing professional education, reviewing changes to any governing documents of the Association, developing strategies for membership recruitment and retention, and overseeing the organization of our annual convention that includes professional development and networking opportunities for psychologists in California. CPA also provides, through our various committees and task forces, information to the public about the importance of psychologically healthy behavior and lifestyles and offers services to California communities. An example is our Public Education Committee, whose members are available to speak to community and public organizations such as PTAs and the Rotary Club, and who also respond to inquiries from the Press about current events that have implications for psychological well-being of Californians. The CPA Disaster Resource Network provides relief services in the event of a natural disaster or significant events such as wildfires that affect California communities, and psychologists with special training are on call to respond as needed. CPA also participates as a member organization of the California Disaster Mental Health Coalition that includes other mental health professional organizations. Through the work of the Board we extend our activities and services to the members of our 20 chapters and our 8 specialty divisions. Our advocacy efforts benefit all psychologists in California, even those who are not members of our organization. This means that we provide services primarily to our approximately 3,000 members and secondarily to the additional 16,000 licensed psychologists in California.

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

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: 76
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 0

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: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13.9%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.6; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.6%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $197K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 14 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.