Fab Owners Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810667666
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Cupertino, CA, USA
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeowners & Tenants Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$426,264
Expenses
$933,466
Assets
$770,203
Liabilities
$394,686

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM SALMON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LT GUTTADAURO (EXEC DIRECTOR EMERITUS & TREA): $476,819 total reported compensation
  • JOSEPH ARDINI (SECRETARY): $126,603 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association was formed to improve the conditions of the semiconductor manufacturing industry.

What it reported doing in 2017

The Association was formed to improve the conditions of the semiconductor industry by providing a forum for the exchange of information relating to the manufacture and distribution of silicon based integrated circuits and MEMS, to address issues that are better addressed through an industry association, to promote cooperation and solutions, to compile statistical information regarding manufacturing and distribution, promote customer awareness and the Associations standards, promote participation in the international standards program and address other issues of common interest.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 total spending goes to programs and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 46.2%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -119%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 64.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 46.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $431K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $477K · 8 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $120K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.