Tri City Economic Development Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
942687078
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Union City, CA, USA
Phone
5104713850
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Recycling Programs

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,615,428
Expenses
$16,764,670
Assets
$17,769,374
Liabilities
$11,953,440

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON TORO (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • HUMBERTO TREJO (DRIVER): $248,885 total reported compensation
  • XIN MOU (DRIVER): $244,761 total reported compensation
  • JAMES JACKSON (DRIVER): $236,261 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 reduce the waste stream, employ disadvantaged youth and adults, and share residual proceeds with the community. Tri-ced forms partnerships with community-based organizations, schools, teachers, and faith-based organizations to promote source reduction, recycling collection, compost creation, and community education programs designed to reduce waste and raise awareness about our environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024, the organization continued to provide individuals with the assets and skills necessary to be positive and productive employees and members of the community. Also, the organization provided curbside recycling, organics collection, and recycling processing. In addition, it operated its own buy back recycling center.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 92
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 4.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.67; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $16.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $249K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 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.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.