Delaware Asphalt Pavement Associati

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510109374
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dover, DE, USA
Phone
3025519634
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$96,828
Expenses
$77,023
Assets
$258,298
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAY MILLER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ASHLEY DUKE (EXECUTIVE AD): $21,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Since 1966 dapa has partnered with deldot to gain advanced knowledge and inventive insight into today's asphalt industry. The industry has consistently evolved through the years and dapa has ensured that Delaware's asphalt producers and contractors evolve with it. Dapa works closely with all its members sharing best paving practices, groundbreaking technologies, and quality testing procedures. Our founding members helped pave the future of Delaware's asphalt industry and as a unified group we can continue to build, shape, and form our state's roads.

What it reported doing in 2025

Provide training to members and to deldot employees, have meetings with deldot on behalf of the membership, have conerences with other state and local officials.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.2%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 71.6%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 9th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.5%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.35; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 37% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.2% of revenue deployed · 71.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $21K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.