Bricklaying & Masonry Trades Joint Apprenticeship Committee

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
370895316
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Belleville, IL, USA
Phone
6182345340
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Domestic Fraternal Societies

Reported finances

Revenue
$21,788
Expenses
$21,604
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID TOENJES (LABOR TRUSTEE): $126,667 total reported compensation
  • MARC LANDERS (LABOR TRUSTEE): $123,248 total reported compensation
  • PETE SPENCE (LABOR TRUSTEE): $110,509 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The bricklaying and masonry trades joint apprenticeship committee oversees the teaching and presenting of seminars to apprentices in the masonry trades.

What it reported doing in 2016

The organization provides and oversees the teaching and presenting of seminars to apprentices in the masonry trades.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 47
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.6%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 50%; rating input score 50; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 985.9%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -13.9% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -16.2% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88.6% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $127K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.