Georgia Fire Sprinkler Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581574426
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Buford, GA, USA
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$157,257
Expenses
$116,541
Assets
$120,238
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALLEN CAGLE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TRACY WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DI): $11,800 total reported compensation
  • RAY VANCE (IMMEDIATE PA): $8,550 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Promote: develop an on-going relationship with state and local fire officials, building officials, authorities having jurisdiction, architects, and engineers. Promote the automatic fire sprinkler industry and develop new markets. Educate: promote educational projects for fire and building officials, architects, engineers, contractor members, and the general public. Perpetuate the quality of automatic sprinkler systems by keeping abreast of innovations, changes and new techniques. Legislate: participate in the establishment of local and state codes regarding the fire sprinkler industry. Promote legislation of fire protection bills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 41% for direct work, and 59% for grants.

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: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 53.7%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 72.5%; rating input score 73
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90%; rating input score 90; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 25.9%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.5%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 53.7% of revenue deployed · 72.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.