Retired Employees of Alameda County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942918337
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5104831186
Rating
90
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$106,474
Expenses
$105,047
Assets
$254,573

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Alicia Baptista (President)
  • Dawn Stevenson (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Alicia Baptista (President)
  • Dawn Stevenson (Vice President)
  • Paul Reeves (Secretary)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the Retired Employees of Alameda County (REAC) is to promote thecommon good and general welfare of Alameda County retired employees, subject tothe County Employees Retirement Act of 1937, by promoting the interests of itsmembers throughout the community by means of social, political and educationalactivities that advance the social welfare of such retirees.

What it reported doing in 2024

Provides information and resources to retired Alameda Countyemployees and their beneficiaries about obtaining and maintaining health and retirement benefits.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.7%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.42; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $105K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.