Coalition for a Better Chinese American Community Cbcac

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814209494
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3127619738
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,712,673
Expenses
$1,069,369
Assets
$1,564,077
Liabilities
$69,381

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathleen Yang-Clayton (President)
  • Kimberly Leung (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • GRACE CHAN MCKIBBEN (Executive Dir.): $100,681 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 coalition for a better chinese american community (cbcac) unites the resources of member organizations and indivdual members to empower chinese american communities in greater chicago. As a coalition member organizations and individuals cbcac carries out its mission through civic eucation, issue advocacy, communication with policy makers, and community mobilization.

What it reported doing in 2024

Civic engagement - the organization aims to amplify the community's voices through civic engagement. The organization have registered thousands of new voters since 2008 and helped voters navigate through language and cultural barriersto cast their barriers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 94% 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 voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.5%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $68.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.2%; rating input score 93; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 37.6%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.46; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 35.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.5% of revenue deployed · 71.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $769K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $101K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.