Sheriffs Foundation for Public Safety

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770565720
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Clovis, CA, USA
Phone
5597678717
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$237,747
Expenses
$205,243
Assets
$2,592,023
Liabilities
$420

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Addie Delgadillo (Executive Dir.): $33,600 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 primary purpose of this foundation is to improve the quality of life for all those served by the resources of the fresno county sheriff's department. The primary objectives of the corporation will be to develop, improve and/or support by direct or indirect means non-profit charitable, educational, prevention or intervention programs and services that improve the quality of life for all within our county. The corporation will also provide support to educational activities and intervention services that aid in the positive return to the community of those who have been incarcerated within our facilities and, the corporation will provide direct and indirect support to the citizen volunteer groups involved in the sheriff's public safety services delivery system.

What it reported doing in 2024

The sheriff's foundation for public safety members were able to serve their community by contributing to various organizations. An undeterminable number of people are benefited directly via those organizations. Funding comes from the different fund-raising events and grants.

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 88% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 75.9%; rating input score 76; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.7%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.63; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.7% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.6% of revenue deployed · 82.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $170K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $34K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.