California State University Los Angeles Auxiliary Services Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 954016653
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3233432525
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $48,265,275
- Expenses
- $47,160,426
- Assets
- $68,893,779
- Liabilities
- $34,797,662
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PATRICK K DAY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- BERENECEA EANES (PRESIDENT)
- TIMOTHY CHANG (DEFACTO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- RAUL CASTANEDA END 07924 (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- LISA CHAVEZ (INTERIM EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- TARIQ MARJI END 41524 (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- BERENECEA EANES (PRESIDENT): $641,686 total reported compensation
- TYRONE W JACKSON (DIRECTOR): $395,720 total reported compensation
- PATRICK K DAY (VICE PRESIDENT): $323,597 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Is a strategic partner, committed to delivering essential services and resources that enrich the quality of life for university students, providing sustainable institutional support that advances student success, and promoting the academic mission of csula.
What it reported doing in 2024
Auxiliary activities: provides significant benefits to the university mission by facilitating research (extramural and intramural) and other projects that enrich the scholarly endeavors of faculty and students. Serves to enhance the services provided by the university, its core function is to assist cal state la faculty and staff in developing and administering funded projects, our services provide more flexibility with an entrepreneurial framework to carry out these activities not normally provided for in the state budget.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 46
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 95.2%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 7.1%; rating input score 7; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.46; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 95.2% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 14 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $45.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $642K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $352K reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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.
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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 7/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.