Council for Supplier Diversity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
753047002
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8585372281
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$427,994
Expenses
$384,723
Assets
$99,718
Liabilities
$90,513

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RONALD B GARNETT (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • RONALD B GARNETT (President & CEO): $111,752 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to use the disciplines of supplier diversity initiatives as an engine for economic development in underrepresented communites. We are dedicated to expanding business oppurtunities for women, minority and service-disabled veteran business enterprises. The ultimate outcome is to add economic value to the supply chain while increasing economic opportunities for the diverse business community. We believe that diverse business development is a key component of reducing poverty, lowering unemployment, increasing wealth, and integrating american society.

What it reported doing in 2024

Programs conducted throughout the year including seminars, networking opportunities, contract sourcing exchanges, and workshops with the purpose of strengthening the capabilities of diverse business enterprises while increasing economic opportunities for them.we also have a collaboration with the university of san diego school of business faculty to provide capacity building training to diverse business enterprises.we have established local collaborations with access community services, san diego youth services, regional taskforce for homeless and many other community based organizations that support underserved communities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.5%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 72.9%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.91; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.5% of revenue deployed · 72.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $280K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 9/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.