Independent Roofing Contractors of California Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 680155170
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Ripon, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9259130145
- Rating
- 48
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,329,969
- Expenses
- $852,292
- Assets
- $1,664,860
- Liabilities
- $16,985
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES GARDNER (President)
Highest reported compensation
- LORELEI UPSHAW (SEC/EXEC DIR.): $133,425 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ircc is a professional association of California roofing contractors whose mutual aims include manpower resource development and training.
What it reported doing in 2025
Apprenticeship standards training for roofing mechanics for northern California.manpower resource development and training:* creation and maintenance of optional alternative resource for recruitment and placement of roofing mechanics and apprentices.* maintenance of database of worker profiles, employment histories, and skill levels per classification of work within the trade; accessible to member contractor for his or her use in screening, placing and wage determination of new personnel.* statewide, division of apprenticeship and training approved (das) training program for apprentices, journeymen, foremen and management personnel.employer assistance and services:* provide access for optional programs for health insurance, general liability, pension and group legal.* hotline assistance on matters concerning public works audits, safety/osha requirements and labor matters.* newsletter for members and periodic updates covering association functions, news items and special interest articles on products, safety, legislation and law.common interest coalition for legislative & legal reform:* maintenance of information resource pertaining to the special needs of California roofing industry; legislative updates, federal and state regulations which impact California's roofing contractors on matters regarding safety, training, public works, bidding, insurance, and human resource management.* representation in dealing with government officials and bodies to ensure fair consideration of California roofing contractor's needs.* collective sponsorship of legal action, where necessary, to defend issues of common interest and of significant impact on the California roofing industry.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 most voting board members are independent. 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: 74
- Sustainability: 69
- 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: 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 35.9%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.95; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $765K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $133K · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 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.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.