Electrical Contractors Trust of Alameda County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946089002
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Hayward, CA, USA
Phone
5108670487
Rating
35
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$282,805
Expenses
$272,099
Assets
$524,881
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Deanna Murchison (Coordinator Secretary): $37,594 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Electrical Contractors Trust of Alameda County supports career awareness initiatives that promote opportunities within the electrical industry through education outreach public engagement and relationship-building efforts. The Trust works to connect students educators and the community with career pathways in the construction and electrical trades while supporting the growth and advancement of the electrical industry.

What it reported doing in 2025

Industry Promotions & Career Awareness outreach safety fairs career fairs school community partnership

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 13
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 14.3%; rating input score 14; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.93; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.8%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $142K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $38K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 39 current checks pass · 7 findings to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 14/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompDisqualPersons column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticOrgs column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.