Ci University Auxiliary Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
731633096
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Camarillo, CA, USA
Phone
8054378400
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,583,939
Expenses
$3,702,022
Assets
$3,618,134
Liabilities
$2,273,784

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN LAZARUS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS)
  • HELEN ALATORRE (ASI EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BARBARA REX (OUTGOING-TREASURER/CHIEF FINANCIAL): $315,291 total reported compensation
  • STEPHANIE BRACAMONTES (SECRETARY): $297,581 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL GRAVAGNE (DIRECTOR): $228,454 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Uas hospitality services provides csu channel islands students, faculty, staff and other members of the California state university, channel islands community and guests with high quality dining, catering and conference services, which are contemporary, diverse, safe, aesthetically pleasing, responsive to customer needs and feature a variety of nutritious and innovative dining options. These services are provided in a fiscally responsible way that complement and enhance the educational mission of the university.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ci university auxiliary services, inc. Is responsible for all food operations on the California state university, channel islands campus. This includes the food facilities within the student union building consisting of ekho's caf, serving sandwiches, salads, grilled products, sushi, pastries, and beverages including coffee, and the sea store which is a small convenience store; coastal cup located in gateway hall, serving coffee, tea, pastries, and grab-and-go food options; and islands kitchen which is located adjacent to the south quad, providing dining for our residential students, commuter students, employees and members of the public. (continued on schedule o)catering provides services to the campus as well as external clients. In fiscal year 2025, the organization entered into an agreement with chartwells to help operate the campus dining services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 44.7%; rating input score 45
  • 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: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 37.5%; rating input score 38; 10th 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: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -133.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.63; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.2%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 44.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.