The Daily Californian
Legal name: Independent Berkeley Student Publishing Company Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941749180
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Berkeley, CA, US
- Phone
- 5105488300
- Rating
- 71
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $749,163
- Expenses
- $633,792
- Assets
- $307,127
- Liabilities
- $180,854
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kyle Garcia-Takata (EIC & President)
- Ananya Rupanagunta (EIC & President)
- Linda Gage (Vice President)
- Monica Lam (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Kyle Garcia-Takata (EIC & President): $5,825 total reported compensation
- Ananya Rupanagunta (EIC & President): $4,405 total reported compensation
- Aimee Han (Secretary): $2,235 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Independent Berkeley Student Publishing Co., Inc. (The Daily Californian) is an independent newspaper that trains UC Berkeley students for careers in journalism and business. The paper and its digital products are the primary source for city and university news in Berkeley.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Daily Cal exists to serve UC Berkeley students and the campus community.The Daily Cal gathers and disseminates news and information about the university and campus life.The Daily Cal provides students resume-building jobs and an upward progression of work experiences and job titles.The Daily Cal teaches students: journalism, and how to gather and present news and information fairly and concisely; advertising, marketing and fundraising; sales of goods and services; business skills, from basic accounting to financial analysis; marketing skills (product, position, placement, price promotion); management and leadership.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 80
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 62.8%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 74.2%; rating input score 74
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 82.4%; rating input score 82; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 15.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 62.8% of revenue deployed · 74.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $470K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 17 people listed
- Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.