Florida Association of Agencies Serving the Blind Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592905001
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Sarasota, FL, USA
Phone
3058982636
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,104,432
Expenses
$2,121,834
Assets
$794,572
Liabilities
$730,029

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA HOWARD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RAVEN HOLLOWAY (PRESIDENT)
  • CHANTEL BUCK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AMY GRISSOM (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA HOWARD (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $52,046 total reported compensation
  • AMY GRISSOM (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $18,218 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Florida association of agencies serving the blind is to serve as a united voice and be the organizational support empowering private agencies serving floridans with blindness and visual impairment to provide state-of-the-art professional vision rehabilitation services which enhance the quality of individual and community life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Serving as a united voice and being the organizational support empowering private agencies serving floridans with blindness and visual impairment to provide state-of-the-art professional vision rehabilitation services which enhance the quality of individual and community life.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 97.5%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 96.7%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.92; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 97.5% of revenue deployed · 96.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.