Make-a-wish Foundation of Central Ca

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770116530
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Fresno, CA, USA
Phone
5592219474
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Patient Services - Entertainment, Recreation

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,461,805
Expenses
$980,404
Assets
$1,633,999
Liabilities
$1,119,559

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DIANA RAMBO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DIANA RAMBO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $119,488 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Grant the wishes of children between the ages of 2 1/2 and 18 with life-threatening medical conditions to enrich the human experience with hope, strength and joy.

What it reported doing in 2017

The make-a-wish foundation of central California has fulfilled more than 2,497 wishes since it's inception in 1985. The chapter employs 5 full-time staff members and is supported by a constituency of approximately 75 volunteers. Sixteen of these volunteers dedicated their time serving on the board of directors and overseeing the chapter's governance, development and management activities. During the fiscal year, the chapter delivered 101 wishes for children with life-threatening medical conditions from the eight California counties covered by the chapter.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32.9%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.69; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.2%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40% of revenue deployed · 59.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $579K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • 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.

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 40/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.