Head Start California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770412315
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Phone
9164447760
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Child Day Care

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,262,845
Expenses
$1,395,872
Assets
$1,938,054
Liabilities
$339,055

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jodie Keller (President)
  • Luis Bautista (Vice President)
  • Stacey Scarborough (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melanee Cottrill (Executive Dir.): $167,325 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We are the premier advocacy organization for Head Start agencies throughoutCalifornia. We advocate for our members at the federal, state and local county levelensuring that members speak with a unified voice about the challenges facingCalifornia's most vulnerable families, and the Head Start community that servesthem. By communicating with members, and creating opportunities for learning andconnecting, members are increasingly engaged, unified and supported as they work tobetter serve their clients and communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Head Start California works with the California Dept of Education's Early Education& Support Division (CDE-EESD) and the California Head Start State CollaborationOffice (CHSSCO) to coordinate efforts to simplify and align state policy and regulations on behalf of Head Start programs, many of whom also have State Preschool contracts, and to facilitates communication between Head Start agencies and CDE-EESD and CHSSCO including collecting input and feedback from the field and disseminating information to the field.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.2%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 71.9%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.39; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.2% of revenue deployed · 71.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $167K · 23 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.