Sacramento Area Regional Technology Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680332874
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
9162310770
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$588,179
Expenses
$593,676
Assets
$29,328
Liabilities
$47,428

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

37 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Howard Bubb (Chief Executive Officer)
  • KIRK UHLER (Chief Executive Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Howard Bubb (Chief Executive Officer): $44,059 total reported compensation
  • KIRK UHLER (Chief Executive Officer): $32,202 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote and educate businesses in the sacramento metropolitan area with regard to development of new technologies.

What it reported doing in 2015

Sarta supports development stage technology companies by offering both startup resources and the following categories of programs and services:1. Knowledge/mentorship: entrepreneurial training, education and high level hands-on mentoring to address management, recruitment, technical, financial and business challenges.2. Funding: identify sources and provide access to capital for the growth or expansion of technology-based businesses with innovative products.3. Network: connect with regional business leaders and affiliate with key groups including service providers, investors and complementary businesses. Use of sarta network to locate appropriate facilities or incubator space, affordable professional service providers, and opportunities for r&d partnerships.In 2015, SARTA assisted over 200 early stage companies with business planning mentor and financing assistance in the 4 major areas of focus: AgTech, MedTech, CleanTech and General Tech.SARTA held its signature TechEdge event in June with 1000 attendees and co-managed the World Food Center program at UC Davis in November plus and numerous smaller mixers for the vertical programs throught the year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.2%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: -0.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.62; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -24.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -14.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -126.5% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 26 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $510K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $44K · 37 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

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: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.