Student Senate for California Community Colleges
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475327498
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8663253222
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Student Services, Organizations of Students
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,946,738
- Expenses
- $2,868,887
- Assets
- $4,561,552
- Liabilities
- $960,275
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
27 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- IVAN HERNANDEZ (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DR JULIE ADAMS (EXECUTIVE DI): $216,381 total reported compensation
- ALEXIS BRAVO (VP OF COMMUN): $6,000 total reported compensation
- JOSHUA SIMON (VICE PRESIDE): $6,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To pursue policies that will improve student access, promote student success, engage and empower local student leaders, and enrich the collegiate experience for all of the California community college students.
What it reported doing in 2024
In this fiscal year, the ssccc performed three major activities: 1) provided leadership training and professional development to 116 association student organizations on California community colleges (ccc) through a number of venues including conferences, workshops, and regional events; 2) appointed students to participate in the ccc governance process through committees, workgroups, and taskforces; and 3) educated others and advocated for bills and legislative measures that affect students in higher education, as well as sponsor or co-sponsor legislation on the students behalf.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 77% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 87
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 95
- Program expense ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 97
- 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: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.6%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.59; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 37.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 27.3% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 33.4% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 96.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 23 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $216K · 27 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.