Technology Training Foundation of America

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330799347
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
8585473992
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$261,990
Expenses
$288,909
Assets
$9,468
Liabilities
$139,615

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEANETTE ROACHE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEANETTE ROACHE (PRESIDENT): $68,750 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The technology training foundation of america (ttfa) computer donation program provides public/private partnerships that help bridge the "digital divide and create wider opportunities for underserved communities in our technological world.

What it reported doing in 2016

The technology training foundation of america (ttfa) is a statewide computer donation program that provides the necessary tools for life-long learning in underserved markets and communities and increases technology knowledge and accessibility to high quality, state-of-the-art refurbished computers in k-12 schools and to non-profit organizations in California.ttfa provides workforce training through its refurbishment/repair program and it provides needed computers, for a nominal fee, to existing community-based computer training programs. Ttfa works with public and private organizations to expand technology and education opportunities through skills training so that the underserved individuals in those programs have the opportunity to enter the workforce.ttfa donated 427 cpu's, 32 laptops, 395 flat screens, 427 keyboards and mice to schools and non-profit organizations in 2016. The program continues to have a significant impact on helping bridge the digital divide. In addition, all equipment processed through ttfa stays out of our already over crowded landfills. This reporting period, 205,955 lbs of computers and electonics were kept out of landfills making a grand total of over 8,543,370, lbs since the program began, achievements that are not measurable are visibility/awareness of the program and time given to sustain partherships with training centers to provide computer trianing. Partnerships with repair facilities that teach and do computer repair. Partnerships with corporations that provide equipment, and partnerships with recyclers

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.1%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 88.1%; rating input score 88; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.3%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 14.75; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -62% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -52.9% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -66.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76.1% of revenue deployed · 69.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $201K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $69K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2014 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is recorded as not currently operating in California.