California Turfgrass and Landscape Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
452709093
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Manhattan Beach, CA, USA
Phone
3105467127
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$85,024
Expenses
$106,518
Assets
$118,505
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRUCE R WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRUCE R WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $4,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To raise funds to support turfgrass research that is conducted throughout the state of California. That research is in the areas of turfgrass and landscape and includes salinity management, drought resistance, disease suppression and evaluation of proper cultivars for use in ca.

What it reported doing in 2017

The organization raises funds to support turfgrass research that is conducted in the areas of turfgrass and landscape management. The organization raised over $85,000 and $94,000 is earmarked for an endowment at uc regents.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 95% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: Limited
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.3%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.11; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.8%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -17.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $99K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2016 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.