American Concrete Pressure Pipe Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362142967
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Hattiesburg, MS, USA
Phone
7148010298
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$359,301
Expenses
$316,077
Assets
$380,294
Liabilities
$4,604

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN BAAS (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KEVIN BAAS (President & CEO): $181,030 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote interests of concrete pressure pipe industry

What it reported doing in 2025

Communications - develop web-based and hard copy marketing material to promote the use of concrete pressure pipe in the water and watewater industries. The material may include brochures, informational videos and project articles. Legislative - engage policymakers within the united states, canada, and around the world to promote and advance the concrete pressure pipe industry. Participate with several broad-based coalitions that monitor and influence legislative and regulatory topics of interest to the industry. Engineering and compliance audits - develop educational programs for member employees. Oversee acppa audit certification program. Participate on external committees with organizations having similar goals and objectives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 15
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 16.8%; rating input score 17
  • Program expense ratio: 16.6%; rating input score 17
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.2; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 57.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -16.8% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 16.8% of revenue deployed · 16.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $181K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 17/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.