Cesar Chavez Student Center San Francisco State University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911781508
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4153381044
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,171,417
Expenses
$6,281,978
Assets
$7,450,139
Liabilities
$1,903,366

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL MARTIN (RISK MGMT DIRECTOR (THRU 06/2014)): $187,085 total reported compensation
  • SHAWN WHALEN (DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF): $144,320 total reported compensation
  • TREVOR GETZ (ACADEMIC SENATE CHAIR): $136,607 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide, maintain, and develop facilities, programs, and support services that promote and enrich the educational, social, and cultural needs and objectives of our richly diverse campus and local communities.

What it reported doing in 2013

Richard oakes multicultural center (romc) program - space for cultural events and discussion that focuses on everything from inspirational leaders to commemorative months. The center also provides a collaborative and supportive environment that promotes a multi ethnic, culturally conscious university that affirms the human and intellectual heritage of all people. Four subprograms comprise the romc and those are the romc center, romc library, art gallery and the depot.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 95% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.1%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 51.3%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.24 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 52.6%; rating input score 53; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -21.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.9%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.1% of revenue deployed · 51.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $3.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $187K · 19 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $188K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 53/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.