Monterey Peninsula Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942541783
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-PF 2013, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Monterey, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8316491533
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,338,570
- Expenses
- $21,396,299
- Assets
- $50,692,748
- Liabilities
- $8,068,314
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVE JOHN (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- STEVE JOHN (CEO): $644,013 total reported compensation
- NANCY ENTERLINE (VP PHILANTHROPY): $323,666 total reported compensation
- JEANNE KLEINSORG (DIR OF FINANCE, SECRETARY): $232,615 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To improve the quality of life in monterey county and surrounding areas by providing grants to nonprofit organizations that benefit the community in the areas of youth, education, health and human services, arts and culture, and community and environment. The foundation generates funds by arranging and managing the annual golf tournaments known as "the at&t pebble beach national pro-amateur tournament and "the pure insurance championship at pebble beach."
What it reported doing in 2024
The monterey peninsula foundation enhances the quality of life in monterey county and surrounding areas through strategic disbursement of charitable funds generated by hosting the at&t pebble beach pro-am and the pure insurance championship at pebble beach. The foundation provided 187 grants, 56 tournament related gifts, 21 service organization donations, and 50 sponsorships and other gifts during fiscal year ending 6/30/2025.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 86
- Transparency & Controls: 59
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.6%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 83.8%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $18.46 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.37; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.6% of revenue deployed · 83.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17.9M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $644K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $599K reported
- Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 470 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 199 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.