Travis Credit Union's Community Financial Wellness Fund
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 824159040
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Vacaville, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2022884343
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Corporate Foundations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $64,518
- Expenses
- $57,059
- Assets
- $554,590
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DAMIAN ALARCON-YOUNG (VICE CHAIRMAN/PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KEVIN MILLER (CHAIRMAN): $987,513 total reported compensation
- JESSE LEAVITT (TREASURER): $309,698 total reported compensation
- DAMIAN ALARCON-YOUNG (VICE CHAIRMAN/PRESIDENT): $238,336 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Travis credit union's community financial wellness fund is committed to building financially empowered communities. Their vision is to create philanthropic solutions for building sustainable financial wellness in communities for generations to come. The foundation raises funds for financial education initiatives and resources, scholarships for youth and adults and disaster relief.
What it reported doing in 2024
The foundation launched its inaugural financial coaching grant program, awarding grants to three nonprofit organizations in northern California, vacaville solano services corp., san pablo economic development corp., and safequest solano. Each recipient received $30,000 in unrestricted operating support and up to $9,000 for professional development training to become certified financial coaches. At year end, financial coaches onboarded 100 low-to-moderate income clients into the coaching program.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 57
- Sustainability: 58
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.4%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: 79.4%; rating input score 79; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.72; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 158.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -75.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -65.4% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 34.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 88.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $57K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $988K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.