Arizona Fire District Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860439018
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Chandler, AZ, USA
Phone
4804964331
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$254,796
Expenses
$220,151
Assets
$290,807
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK MOORE (PRESIDENT)
  • DANNY JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY DALTON (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN FLYNN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • PATRICK MOORE (PRESIDENT)
  • DANNY JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JIM MORGAN (TREASURER)

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 goals of afda are advocacy, information, and education to stimulate community understanding of fire districts and promote the general welfare of the public through the use of fire districts.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Arizona fire district association afda exists to support arizonas 143 fire districts, which are designated as political subdivisions of the state of Arizona. In 2024, the afda provided training for 250 elected officials, fire district chiefs, fire district senior and administrative staff members annually. Training consisted of compliance with statutory requirements for operating fire districts, which include governance, administration, financial management, and ethics. The training is provided through afda-sponsored seminars and conferences. The afda provides policy advocacy with Arizona lawmakers and elected officials concerning the effective and efficient operation of fire districts. Advocacy is ongoing throughout the year. Afda guides member fire districts on revenue, expenditure, and operational matters as needed throughout the year.

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

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.7%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 88.5%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.7% of revenue deployed · 88.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $195K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.