Arda Resort Owners Coalition

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461457252
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023716700
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,454,349
Expenses
$3,765,469
Assets
$9,202,074
Liabilities
$132,708

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JASON GAMEL (MEMBER): $830,371 total reported compensation
  • SANDRA DEPOY (ROC DIRECTOR): $507,199 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The arda resort owners coalition (arda-roc) is a non-profit program dedicated to preserving, protecting and enhancing vacation ownership. Arda-roc is an alliance of owners, developers and managers who are committed to advocating for local, state and federal policies that enable the vacation ownership industry to thrive.

What it reported doing in 2025

The specific purpose of the arda resort owners coalition (arda-roc) is to engage in public policy and legislative advocacy, educational activities, and public interest litigation on behalf of timeshare owners of vacation resort properties and timeshare vacation resort associations, thereby promoting civic betterments and social improvements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 88.2%; rating input score 88
  • 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: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.44; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.8% of revenue deployed · 88.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $830K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $1.7M reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 24 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.