California Wetfish Producers Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562386130
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Buellton, CA, USA
Phone
8056935430
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Fisheries Resources

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,185,627
Expenses
$839,858
Assets
$923,305
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK FINA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • VINCE TORRE (PRESIDENT)
  • NEIL GULIELMO (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK FINA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The major goals are to protect and maintain access to wetfish resources in California, promote sustainable production of wetfish resources in California, and facilitate communication within and outside the wetfish industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

CWPA represented interests of member fishery participants, including harvesters and processors, in several forums, including principally with the Pacific Fishery Management Council, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). This work is intended to maintain sustainability and access to coastal pelagic species (CPS) fisheries (including squid, anchovy, sardine, mackerel). CPWA has engaged in research to ensure the sustainability of CPS fisheries. Specifically, CWPA has administered nearshore acoustic surveys of CPS in coordination with NMFS and has provided support to CDFW for validation and generation of correction factors for aerial surveys of CPS. CWPA has also surveyed market squid paralarva and conducted related research concerning squid recruitment. CPS is also leading a research project exploring nearshore dynamics of sardine populations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.2%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $766K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 15 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $117K reported
  • Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.