Moreno Valley Unified School District School Facilities Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330476900
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Moreno Valley, CA, USA
Phone
9515717500
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,369,781
Expenses
$1,369,650
Assets
$1,296
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRANDY CLARK (PRESIDENT)
  • SAMMIE LUNA (VICE PRESIDENT (FROM 8/2024))

Highest reported compensation

  • SUSANA LOPEZ (CHIEF BUSINESS OFFICIAL): $354,339 total reported compensation
  • ALEJANDRO RUVALCABA (SUPERINTENDENT (FROM 7/2024)): $229,149 total reported compensation
  • BRANDY CLARK (PRESIDENT): $18,021 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Assist in acquiring or constructing capital facilities to be used by the moreno valley unified school district.

What it reported doing in 2024

The corporation issues certificates of participation to the general investors. The capital received is used to acquire real and/or personal property and lease it to the district. The district will use the property to meet its public purpose. The district will make rental payments for the use and occupancy of the property, which the corporation will assign to a trustee to repay the principal and interest of the amounts borrowed by the corporation to finance the acquisition and construction of the facilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -36.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $354K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.