The Campbell Center Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954283590
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Glendale, CA, USA
Phone
8182422434
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Developmentally Disabled Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$224,325
Expenses
$412,504
Assets
$817,914
Liabilities
$13,109

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert Schacht (CEO)
  • Capt Todd Stokes (President)
  • Muhannad Malki (President Elect)

People named in this filing

  • Jamie Gonzalez (Director)
  • Kim Guard (Director)
  • Hilda Tourians (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Campbell Center Foundation (TCCF) exists exclusively for the benefit of The Campbell Center. The purpose of the TCCF is to insure the long term financial strength and stability of The Campbell Center. The officers and directors of TCCF serve without compensation of any kind.The Campbell Center Foundation's primary responsibility is to raise money from various sources including but not limited to personal donations, corporate donations, grants, fundraising events, memorials and endowments.

What it reported doing in 2017

The Foundation is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of The Campbell Center (previously known as GAR), a California non-profit public benefit corporation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 82% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The required major-donor schedule is missing or incomplete and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: No; rating input score 0
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -83.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.98; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $405K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Major donor itemization scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.