Association of Alaska School Boards

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920098760
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Juneau, AK, USA
Phone
9074631660
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,816,458
Expenses
$9,958,817
Assets
$4,377,909
Liabilities
$2,422,614

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARGO BELLAMY (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • LON D GARRISON (EXECUTIVE DI): $163,947 total reported compensation
  • TIMI TULLIS - ASSOCIATE (EXECUTIVE DI): $154,155 total reported compensation
  • LORI GRASSGREEN - DIRECTOR FOR (COMMUNITY EN): $151,678 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the association of Alaska school boards is to advocate for children and youth by assisting school boards in providing quality public education, focused on student achievement, through effective local governance.

What it reported doing in 2024

Core support service programs advocacy - a registered lobbyist is on staff to provide federal and state advocacy in advancing legislation that promotes local control and enhances student achievement. The lobbyist manages and trains board members as a grass roots advocacy asset. Cdl - consortium for digital learning (cdl) offers a full menu of services to school districts in project management, professional development, and development of digital resources and other services which support the needed critical factors of digital learning environments which help assure student success. Policy development - aasb provides assistance with questions and sample policies, as well as expert consultation when reviewing or revising school district manuals. Aasb also offers policy online services to convert policy manuals to an online reference tool complete with links to legal references. Superintendent search services - aasb provides expert facilitation of the entire search process, including identifying the needs of the school district, recruiting candidates, and conducting the interviews. Strategic planning - aasb facilitates workshops to help boards establish a vision for the district and develop specific action plans that benefit student learning in measurable ways. School climate and connectedness survey (sccs) - sccs is a useful tool for schools looking to strengthen their overall climate and connectedness, improve their approach to increasing student achievement, and help kids succeed beyond the classroom. Board development - aasb provides customized workshops on topics such as teamwork, board/superintendent relations, school board self-evaluation and goal setting. Aasb offers many training opportunities: boardmanship academies are held three times a year in the spring, fall and winter; leadership/legislative fly-ins are held twice each legislative session to help board presidents and officers develop skills (this top quality program is an opportunity for school board members to hone communication skills, become more effective and productive leaders, equip them with the basics of the legislative process, and help them connect with their legislative delegation); and the annual conference is held each november (this gathering of education leaders brings together most of the school board members in the state). Conference programs feature renowned speakers, education clinics and a resolution session that gives aasb its direction.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.2%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $89.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -1.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.55; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.5% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.2% of revenue deployed · 94.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 21 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $576K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.