California School Employees Association Dba Riverside Unifed

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770036129
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Riverside, CA, USA
Phone
9517887135
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Mutual/Membership Benefit N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,903
Expenses
$98,886
Assets
$55,412
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Green (President)
  • Anthony Sines (1st Vice President)
  • David Salazar (2nd Vice President)
  • Adriana Resendiz (3rd Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Michael Green (President)
  • Anthony Sines (1st Vice President)
  • David Salazar (2nd Vice President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide services, training, and representation for dues paying members/employees.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Chapter pays 1/4 of the Chief Union Steward's annual salary, who participates in union negotiations and to handle employee grievances and issues for approximately 1850 dues paying members/employees. Annual Conference expenses are paid for 14 member/officers to attend the CSEA Annual Conference. Our Chapter sponsors an annual picnic in May during Classified School Employees Week for Chapter members and their families, and a Winter Social Event and Chapter meeting in December to thank employees and provide chapter information and results of officer elections for upcoming year. We provided 2 $500 Scholarships to children of Chapter members who submitted applications in 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -45.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -100% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.