Stanislaus Economic Development and Workforce Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710899774
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Modesto, CA, USA
Phone
2095674985
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,071,779
Expenses
$2,520,088
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

53 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUG JOHNSON (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID WHITE (Executive Dir.): $202,292 total reported compensation
  • STEVEN AMES (OPS. MANAGEMENT): $156,823 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission and responsibility of the alliance is overseeing both economic development and workforce training activities for the county.

What it reported doing in 2015

The alliance is responible for bringing both puplic and private partners together to ensure the continued economic viability of stanislaus county, the two primary goals of the alliance are to provide job training, placement services and to market stanislaus county as a place to do business.

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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -21.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.2% of revenue deployed · 75.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 52 of 52 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $202K · 53 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Board meeting minutes documented not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.