Association of Marine Technicians
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 582497429
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2013
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013
- Location
- Canton, GA, USA
- Phone
- 7704450749
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $99,871
- Expenses
- $130,766
- Assets
- $99,544
- Liabilities
- $2,229
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOSEPH J DEMARCO (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JOSEPH J DEMARCO (PRESIDENT): $27,992 total reported compensation
- JOHN BERNIER (DIR INSTRUCTOR): $4,640 total reported compensation
- TODD LARSON (DIR INSTRUCTOR): $1,600 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Educate, train and promote service excellence among marine industry technicians
What it reported doing in 2013
Member services maintains member website where technicians can netwrook with other technicians on technical problems. Produces technical bulletins and association newsletters to keep members informed on issues.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 55
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 68.4%; rating input score 68
- Program expense ratio: 52.3%; rating input score 52
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -30.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 32.3%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 68.4% of revenue deployed · 52.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $68K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $28K · 19 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.