Community Foundation for Monterey County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941615897
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Monterey, CA, USA
Phone
8313759712
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$122,683,888
Expenses
$72,355,257
Assets
$420,197,115
Liabilities
$87,287,420

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL BALDWIN (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIEL BALDWIN (President & CEO): $441,996 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE DAWSON (SR. VP PHILANTHROPIC SERVICES): $239,958 total reported compensation
  • KIM DRABNER (VP FINANCE & HR): $222,443 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 inspire philanthropy and be a catalyst for strengthening communities throughout monterey county.

What it reported doing in 2024

The community foundations center for nonprofit excellence (cne) works with nonprofit staff, board and volunteers to improve the capacity of the nonprofit sector through training, workshops, consulting and programs. Programs focus on the specific needs of nonprofits, such as: nonprofit governance, donor development and current issues such as executive transitions and leveraging artificial intelligence. The cne also conducts lead (leadership education and development), a professional development institute for nonprofit managers to increase leadership capacity and professional development. To date, it has over 200 alumni from monterey, santa cruz, and san benito counties. Lead participants engage with high-quality leadership and management training, personalized coaching, and the development of a strong peer and alumni network. In 2024, cnes efforts reached 200 organizations overall.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 96% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 84
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.7%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $89.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: 97.9%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 41%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.81; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.1% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.7% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $68.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $442K · 27 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $103K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.