Division I-aaa Athletics Directors Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341965099
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Westlake, OH, USA
- Phone
- 4408924000
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $69,892
- Expenses
- $84,995
- Assets
- $312,661
- Liabilities
- $58,173
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHANEY FINK (PRESIDENT)
- ED MCLAUGHLIN (FRIST VICE PRESIDENT)
- PHIL HUTCHESON (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
- ADRIAN DOWELL (THIRD VICE PRESIDENT)
- PATRICK A MANAK (CEO)
People named in this filing
- SHANEY FINK (PRESIDENT)
- ED MCLAUGHLIN (FRIST VICE PRESIDENT)
- PHIL HUTCHESON (SECOND VICE PRESIDENT)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The division 1 - aaa athletic director's association's primary exempt purpose is to establish common educational standards and objectives among athletic directors by means of in-service education and establishment of standards for personal and professional competencies. In 2025 the division 1 - aaa had 103 dues paying members.
What it reported doing in 2025
Division 1 - aaa establishes educational standards and objectives among athletic directors by means of in-service education and establishment of standards for personal and professional competencies.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 13
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 20.7%; rating input score 21
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -21.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.68; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 20.7% of revenue deployed
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.