Kings Canyon Teachers Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942632775
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Reedley, CA, USA
Phone
5598245864
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$82,523
Expenses
$80,956
Assets
$45,574
Liabilities
$20

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANIE CHIASSON (President)
  • AMANDA OROSCO (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • DALE KENNEDY (Former Presiden)
  • JANIE CHIASSON (President)
  • KRISTI BELL (Secretary)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To represent its members in their relations with their employer, and to seek to be the exclusive representative of appropriate units of school employees in all matters relating to employment conditions and employer-employee relations including, but not limited to, wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment.

What it reported doing in 2017

Conferences, door prizes/gifts, scholarships

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for member benefits.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.5%; rating input score 36
  • Program expense ratio: 36.2%; rating input score 36

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.9%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.1%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.5% of revenue deployed · 36.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2013 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • Review — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization could not be resolved against the register, so the check is unfinished.