Arizona Media Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860264750
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6022524833
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,293,670
Expenses
$3,753,540
Assets
$5,195,627
Liabilities
$237,276

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Chris Kline (President/CEO)
  • Lisa Simpson (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Chris Kline (President/CEO): $312,500 total reported compensation
  • Lisa Simpson (Vice President): $146,624 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 mission of the Arizona Media Association (AMA) is to invest in projects that futureproof Arizona local media and protect its critical role in community connection. The AMA currently represents more than 350 statewide media brands.

What it reported doing in 2025

Awarded $68,400 in internships funding to help members build future employee pipelines.Allocated $74,560 to fund student training programs, career fairs, and scholarships. This included three career fairs attended by more than 40 brands. Produced and distributed 3 political debates to our membership and audiences across Arizona. Dedicated $250,000 to continue the growth of an Arizona Local News Foundation. Invested $40,000 to commission an Arizona media research study of 2025 consumer habits across the state. Supported $160,000 in local media advocacy and legal support, including $125,000 for lobbying support.Maintained an Arizona media website career page, open to all members, to post local media jobs. In 2025, more than 300 jobs were posted.Sent out weekly emails with Arizona local media news, events, industry trends, and key services, and hosted an annual awards luncheon to recognize the best of the media business.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 81% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.1 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 75.6%; rating input score 76; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.6%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.2%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 60% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.4% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $312K · 21 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 31 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.