County Supervisors Association of Calif
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 946000551
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9163277500
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $12,083,004
- Expenses
- $12,394,286
- Assets
- $15,789,501
- Liabilities
- $2,394,055
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
75 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JEFF GRIFFITHS (PRESIDENT)
- SUSAN ELLENBERG (FIRST VICE PRESIDENT)
- LUIS A ALEJO (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
- BRUCE GIBSON (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT, DIRECTOR)
- CHUCK WASHINGTON (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT (THRU 11/24))
- GRAHAM KNAUS (CEO & SECRETARY)
Highest reported compensation
- GRAHAM KNAUS (CEO & SECRETARY): $668,920 total reported compensation
- JACQUELINE WALKOW (CPO): $511,813 total reported compensation
- CHASTITY BENSON (COO): $446,307 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 mission of the organization is to serve California counties by: developing and equipping county leaders to better serve their communities; effectively advocating and partnering with state and federal governments for appropriate policies, laws, and funding; and communicating the value of critical work being accomplished by county government.
What it reported doing in 2024
Litigation coordination - monitor litigation of concern to counties statewide, coordinate the defense of major multi-county litigation, provide amicus (friend of the court) support where appropriate and disseminate current information to county counsels in the form of litigation alerts and updates on cases involving public law issues.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 31
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 81.7%; rating input score 82
- Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 96.5%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: -2.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.27; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 24.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 81.7% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 58 of 58 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $669K · 75 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
- Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 8 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: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.