Cdaa Institute for Education and Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943226023
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9164432017
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Printing, Publishing

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,704
Expenses
$84,003
Assets
$218,619
Liabilities
$124,052

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREGORY TOTTEN (CEO)
  • JONATHAN RAVEN (ASSISTANT CEO)
  • MIKE RAMOS (President)
  • MICHAEL HESTRIN (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • GREGORY TOTTEN (CEO): $214,987 total reported compensation
  • JONATHAN RAVEN (ASSISTANT CEO): $202,812 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 mission and purpose of the institute is to maintain the trust of all californians while promoting a fair and impartial criminal justice system by providing research, education, training, and information to the general public and those involved in the criminal justice system.

What it reported doing in 2024

The prosecutors diversity project addresses the lack of racial diversity with California's prosecution offices by educating and informing individuals of color about the role of the prosecutor in creating safe communities and representing victims, encouraging careers in this area of public law before law school, and creating cultutal awareness that will help dispel the distrust in a criminal justic system that is charged with protecting all of California's citizens.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -173.6%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.6; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.5% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $84K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 12 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.