Friends of the Rancho Cucamonga Library

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330265891
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Rancho Cucamonga, CA, USA
Phone
9094772720
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$199,319
Expenses
$194,891
Assets
$11,425
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Karen Howard (President)
  • Sharon Regalado (Vice President)
  • Rose Quezada (Past President)

People named in this filing

  • Karen Howard (President)
  • Sharon Regalado (Vice President)
  • Faith Collari (CFO)

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

We accept donations of books, dvd's, cd's, videos, etc from the public, we also accept books that are scheduled to be destroyed from the library and we sell them in order to raise funds for the library programs. We purchase a small amount of related items, such as erasers, bookmakers, etc to sell at the stores.

What it reported doing in 2025

Due to the efforts of all of our volunteers and thanks to our community, who donated their used items, we were able to raise almost $190,000 for our public libraries. We don't have any special programs, we operate our stores and if a patron wants to become a member by paying a membership fee, we offer them a discount on their purchases.

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue 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: 100
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

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: 2.2%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -120% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2015 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.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.