Associated Industries of Arkansas Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581891199
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Little Rock, AR, USA
Phone
5013722222
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,504,668
Expenses
$2,749,346
Assets
$2,211,249
Liabilities
$564,037

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RANDY ZOOK (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW PARKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RANDY ZOOK (PRESIDENT): $477,450 total reported compensation
  • KENNETH HALL (SECRETARY): $194,383 total reported compensation
  • ANDREW PARKER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $174,130 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Founded in 1991, the associated industries of Arkansas foundation is a business-led, solutions development and research organization, working in partnership with state business leaders and government officials to advance public knowledge and understanding of economics & finance, education & career training, housing & human relations, science & technology, domestic & international relations, issues contributing to a rising quality of life, as well as other subjects related to improving efficiency, development and acceleration of economic growth and employment opportunities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Since 2015, the aia foundation has researched, developed and launched be pro be proud, an effort designed to change public perceptions of skilled professions within the manufacturing, construction, utility and transportation industries across Arkansas. The effort has engaged middle and high school students across the state to promote high-demand, high-wage professional opportunities within these sectors. Impacts related to these efforts include increased employment within targeted fields as well as increased enrollments - significant in some places - in post-secondary technical programs on two-year campuses.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 59
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.7%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.8; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 28.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.7% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 14 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $477K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 8 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.