Election Integrity Project California Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 822326062
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- Santa Clarita, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6613135251
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $155,458
- Expenses
- $156,688
- Assets
- $92,204
- Liabilities
- $1,041
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- LINDA PAINE (Chair/President)
People named in this filing
- LINDA PAINE (Chair/President)
- RUTH WEISS (VP/ Director)
- ELAINE KELLY (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To defend, through education, research, and advocacy, the civil rights of U.S citizens to fully participate in the election process under Federal and state law.
What it reported doing in 2025
EDUCATION1. EIPCa delivered presentations to various groups in person and electronically, including 11 education/fundraising tours in CA and DC this year. - EIPCa was invited by national nonprofit organization Eagle Forum to join them in Washington, DC to meet with legislators regarding issues of concern to citizens across the country. EIPCa focused on our work with election integrity issues. - EIPCa President spoke nine times at citizens group events about the issues in the election system in California identified by EIPCa. - EIPCa educated citizens about the research done by EIPCa identifying issues that have resulted in the loss of integrity in CA elections. - EIPCa took the opportunity to update people about the legal action we are involved with and to raise funds to cover the costs. - In our presentations we invite CA citizens, regardless of party affiliation, to sign up with EIPCa to be trained to observe the election process as an EIPCa volunteer.2. EIPCa sent out educational articles explaining what the state and county election procedures are for managing elections and processing ballots. We also sent out educational articles explaining how citizens can observe the election process as a CA citizen if they were not able to sign up to observe with EIPCa.3. EIPCa developed a weekly Newsletter with articles written by EIPCa writers, as well as links to articles regarding election integrity issues across the country. 4. EIPCa maintained a website; sent out group emails, and sent press releases, which provided information and news about election laws, election integrity, and how citizens can be involved. - Our Webmaster created updates to the website to make it possible to post each article and Newsletter after they are sent out, as well a way to present each Series of Articles in a box so that readers can easily find each Series.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 62% for direct work, and 38% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 37
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.1%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 76.5%; rating input score 76
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -10.8% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77.1% of revenue deployed · 76.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $120K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.