Fairfield Building Trades Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237300775
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Goshen, IN, USA
Phone
2695067560
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Employment Procurement Assistance

Reported finances

Revenue
$254,484
Expenses
$243,052
Assets
$4,674
Liabilities
$13,138

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Matt Kritzman (President)
  • Corbie Garber (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Matt Kritzman (President)
  • Corbie Garber (Vice President)
  • Jason Grasty (Secretary)

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 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Each year a building project is undertaken as a project of the Fairfield High School building trades class.

What it reported doing in 2020

Each year a building is undertaken as a project of the Fairfield High School building trades class. Costs incurred represent costs to build and costs of sale, if any. For this fiscal year end of June 30, 2021, the project was completed solely by the Fairfield Building Trades class. Administrative costs that were incurred during the project were handled by the Fairfield Building Trades funds.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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 filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.81; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -26.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 94.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $230K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2017 to 2020
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.