Morgan Hill Classified Employees Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820749827
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Morgan Hill, CA, USA
Phone
9253818892
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$85,686
Expenses
$45,584
Assets
$198,544
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Cheryl Van Deventer (President/Retired)
  • Kim Dehn (Vice President)
  • Elisa Garcia (Vice President/New President 25/26)

People named in this filing

  • Cheryl Van Deventer (President/Retired)
  • Luz Andrade (Secretary)
  • Kim Dehn (Vice President)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of our organization is for the collective bargaining with the school district and to represent the Classified Employees of the Morgan Hill Unified School District regarding discipline and employment issues.

What it reported doing in 2025

The association was able to help over 200 classified employees with any discipline issues that may have occurred during the year 2025. We were able to negotiate on behalf of all employees an increase in benefits and wages. We issued 11 scholarships scholarships to eligible children of classified employee members. Also, we sent 2 officers to leadership conferences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.8%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.36; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -75% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.