San Juan Professional Educators Coalition
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 204471198
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Carmichael, CA, USA
- Phone
- 9166063756
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Labor Unions
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $97,448
- Expenses
- $87,569
- Assets
- $256,507
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Damon Smith (Past President)
- Kirk Bebout (President Elect)
- Melanie Allen (President)
People named in this filing
- Damon Smith (Past President)
- Ken Armbrust (Treasurer)
- Kirk Bebout (President Elect)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization's primary purpose is to advocate for and represent its members pursuant to the education employment relations act, commencing with section 3540 of the government code (eera) and to operate as a labor organization within the meaning of section 23701a of the California revenue and taxation code. Within the scope of these activities the spjec does not contemplate pecuniary gain or profit to its memebers and is organized for nonprofit purposes.achievements and services provided to the members of the organization include collective bargaining voice for employment contracts in the areas of wages, hours and conditions of employment.
What it reported doing in 2025
As school leaders, SJPEC members are constantly advocating for better public schools and strong leadership by school administrators. SJPEC members support educational reforms on public policy that put students first and include school administrators in the discussion and implementation of the policies.
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
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 51
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.1%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.93; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 57.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 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 — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.