Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Aprntic Eshipjrnyman Training Fund San Diego

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
953366630
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192652758
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Job Training

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,400,764
Expenses
$1,443,538
Assets
$8,430,440
Liabilities
$6,730

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • LORENZO MILES (TRAINING DIRECTOR): $165,337 total reported compensation
  • ESTEBAN SANDOVAL (INSTRUCTOR): $158,702 total reported compensation
  • DAVID FOX (INSTRUCTOR): $158,033 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is dedicated to providing the men and women working in the sheet metal industry with training necessary to afford the skills and knowledge necessary to participate in this industry at the highest productivity level.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Apprenticeship and Journeyman Training Fund (the Fund) was organized on July 1, 1976 for the following purposes: To develop comprehensive training programs for journeymen and apprentices, and through training, to upgrade the general quality of workmanship and productivity; To investigate, research, and monitor changing technology, and to anticipate and implement training needs; To provide training for new specialty fields engendered by changing technology, to provide training in the use of new materials and new methods, and to establish skills and proficiency in the Sheet Metal Industry and other related fields to which the skills of journeymen and apprentice sheet metal workers may be adapted; To conduct manpower surveys and to promote training of qualified individuals through established training programs, to alleviate shortages of manpower wherever such shortages are found to exist, to prepare, publish and distribute recruitment materials, and to employ professional consultants to accomplish these purposes; To provide assistance to other local training programs to upgrade training and quality of workmanship, and; To publicize, by appropriate methods, the work that is being done by the Fund.

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 - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 46
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.7%; rating input score 38
  • Program expense ratio: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 57.6%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.84; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 37.7% of revenue deployed · 76.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $165K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 38/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.