Ameripen

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274010795
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Springfield, MA, USA
Phone
4136869198
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,851,919
Expenses
$1,649,414
Assets
$1,379,981
Liabilities
$297,080

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KELLY SMITH (PRESIDENT)
  • JEN RONK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DAN FELTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAN FELTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $209,064 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 be the leading voice for the packaging industry, using science to inspire, create and advocate for sustainable solutions for the packaging value chain.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule oameripen represents the north american packaging value chain by providing public policy makers with fact-based, material inclusive, scientific information.using sound science and a philosophy of material inclusivity, ameripen develops and advocates positions on issues related to packaging and the environment. Members include leading brand owners, packaging converters, materials suppliers, and recyclers.ameripen is leading on: - proactive public policy, by developing legislative solutions, building industry coalitions, and directly advocating on behalf of its members with an innovative multi-state government affairs strategy. - critical policy discussions across the country to advance positive solid waste management solutions like sustainable materials management, life cycle thinking and more. We host webinars, generate media attention on critical issues, and educate members and policy makers. - food waste, by articulating the role packaging plays in prevention, and identifying best practices and elevating case studies to creating understanding that a little packaging can reduce a lot of waste.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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: 60
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.9%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.7%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $209K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $776K reported
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.