Yes on Prop E for a Safer SF Mayor Breeds Ballot Measure Committee

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934309966
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5104234300
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$479,408
Expenses
$779,363
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • Charles Goss (Pr. Officer)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the committee is to run a campaign in support of San Francisco Proposition E Safer San Francisco 2024 on the ballot for March 5, 2024. The measure will remove obstacles that have been put in place that prevent San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) officers from being able to more effectively and efficiently do their jobs.

What it reported doing in 2024

The committee planned and conducted a political campaign in support of San Francisco Proposition E Safer San Francisco 2024 on the ballot for March 5, 2024. Passage of the measure would remove obstacles that have been put in place that prevent San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) officers from being able to more effectively and efficiently do their jobs. The measure passed with 54% of the vote.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 10
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.7%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $68.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -62.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 156.5% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 1 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $746K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $566K reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.