Mountain View Public Safety Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471030635
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Mountain View, CA, USA
Phone
6509667656
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Safety Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$110,631
Expenses
$107,802
Assets
$396,145
Liabilities
$61,871

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMBER WILSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMBER WILSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $40,430 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 the police and fire department of mountain view, ca and mountain view pal with the goal of making the city a better and safer place to work and live. Providing community outreach programs, training and equipment to help ensure that public safety officers can safely and effectively protect the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Establish youth programs, including after-school programs for underprivileged and underserved youth, intended to encourage citizenship and responsibility and discourage youth away from gangs and criminal activity. Provide affordable public safety training programs including officer safety, skills development, leadership and continuing education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.9%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 54.5%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.6%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.67; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.9% of revenue deployed · 54.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $59K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.