California Workforce Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680100006
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9163251610
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,857,666
Expenses
$2,662,851
Assets
$1,423,060
Liabilities
$958,274

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

Leadership & pay

47 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Kelli Oropeza-Grimes (CFO): $266,632 total reported compensation
  • Curtis Notsinneh (Executive Dir.): $25,977 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote, enhance and serve the interests of local workforce development partnerships.

What it reported doing in 2024

Led a range of impactful initiatives to strengthen workforce development across the state. These included hosting multiple boot camps, promoting equitable economic recovery at the regional level, and launching a youth apprenticeship program. Provided technical assistance to businesses and workforce boards to support employers impacted by the pandemic and delivered several capacity-building trainings to enhance the effectiveness of local workforce systems. Continued implementation of the Employment Training Panel (ETP) program, enabling Local Workforce Development Boards to collaborate more effectively with employers in upskilling incumbent workers and addressing evolving industry demands.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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: 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.8%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.6% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 45 of 45 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $267K · 47 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $227K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.