Orange County Visitors Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330872097
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Irvine, CA, USA
Phone
9493367218
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$238,576
Expenses
$188,240
Assets
$3,975
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

63 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ED FULLER (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ED FULLER (President & CEO): $20,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promoting tourism in orange county, ca.

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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 51.9%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21.1%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41% of revenue deployed · 51.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 63 of 63 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $98K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $20K · 63 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.