The Police Credit Union
Legal name: The Police Credit Union of California
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941278209
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- San Bruno, CA, US
- Phone
- 800.222.1391 (Option 4)
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $51,550,361
- Expenses
- $51,276,300
- Assets
- $1,049,087,973
- Liabilities
- $942,129,345
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- EDDIE YOUNG (PRESIDENT/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- EDDIE YOUNG (PRESIDENT/CEO): $765,063 total reported compensation
- MICHAEL BARE (CFO): $408,381 total reported compensation
- DEIRDRE CLOHERTY (COO): $369,053 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The police credit union of California is a cooperative, organized for the purpose of promoting thrift and savings among its members, creating a source of credit for them at rates of interest set by the board of directors, and providing an opportunity for them to use and control their own money on a democratic basis in order to improve their economic and social conditions. As a cooperative, the police credit union of California conducts its business for the mutual benefit and general welfare of its members with the earnings, savings, benefit, or service of the credit union being distributed to its members as patrons.
What it reported doing in 2025
Achieved satisfactory results in providing members with consumer loans from a broad array of product offerings, including vehicle loans, credit cards and personal lines of credit.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 45
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 73.5%; rating input score 74; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.5%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.46; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.9; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $765K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2M reported
- Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 23 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.