North CA Mason Contractors Association BeneSys Desiree Eaton
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 943035294
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Pleasanton, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9253987060
- Rating
- 54
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Mutual/Membership Benefit N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $251,161
- Expenses
- $224,929
- Assets
- $1,004,657
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tom Sneed (CEO)
People named in this filing
- Ron Bennett (Executive Dir.)
- Tom Sneed (CEO)
- Dave Pierson (CFO)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization is an advocate of the bricklaying industry.
What it reported doing in 2025
They meet with contractors, architects & developers to encourage the use of masonry.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Affiliate network. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending through affiliated organizations.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and total assets are large relative to annual expenses, but may not be spendable cash. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 52
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 0
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
- Program expense ratio: 53%; rating input score 53
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 10.4%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.47; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 53.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 53% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.