Don Bosco Technical Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
951860996
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Rosemead, CA, USA
Phone
6269402000
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,635,290
Expenses
$9,572,008
Assets
$18,243,438
Liabilities
$1,387,082

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GUILLERMO GUTIERREZ (PRESIDENT)
  • PHILIP R CONSUEGRA (VICE PRESIDENT OF ADVANCEMENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • GUILLERMO GUTIERREZ (PRESIDENT): $172,598 total reported compensation
  • PHILIP R CONSUEGRA (VICE PRESIDENT OF ADVANCEMENT): $154,625 total reported compensation
  • JEFFREY KRYNEN (PRINCIPAL): $151,521 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Guided by the salesian educational system of st. John bosco, don bosco technical institute is a catholic high school which offers a rigorous college preparatory curriculum, uniquely integrating academics and technology.

What it reported doing in 2024

The school is the only all-male high school in the state that integrates a rigorous college preparatory curriculum with a comprehensive, four-year project-based applied science, engineering and technology program. The school served approximately 343 students and had a 100% acceptance rate among its graduates.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 97
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.2%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 73.5%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

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: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95%; rating input score 95; 25th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.8%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.91; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.2% of revenue deployed · 73.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 24 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $444K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.