Association of Ymca Professionals

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
135616526
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3124198474
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$552,942
Expenses
$488,215
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

People named in this filing

  • SAL CISNEROS (DIRECTOR/CHA)
  • SANDY MORANDER (DIRECTOR/PAS)
  • KELLY KAY (DIRECTOR/TRE)

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 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association of ymca professionals (ayp) inspires, connects and empowers y leaders to achieve personal excellence to support the movement.

What it reported doing in 2017

Connecting and providing learning opportunities for ymca professionals are the primary functions of the organization. Ayp's magazine reached more than 5,500 members. A professional community web site gives members online connection opportunities. Monthly e-newsletters and weekly notes provide information that advances careeer opportunities and provide leadership ideas for ayp members. Localized communication and web sites provide other means of education and networking. Ayp held more than 20 chapter and regional meetings advancing the ymca profession, providing networking, education and career advancement opportunities for its members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some related-organization disclosures are missing and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.3%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: Scored; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.7%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 41.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -28.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $488K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes related organizations
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.