Greater Albuquerque Innkeepers Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850457793
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2018
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2018
Location
Albuquerque, NM, USA
Phone
5055506118
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$63,292
Expenses
$64,559
Assets
$33,480
Liabilities
$653

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2018. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kimberly Berry (Vice President)
  • Charlie Gray (Executive Director)
  • Michelle Dressler (President)

People named in this filing

  • Kimberly Berry (Vice President)
  • Damem Kompanowski (Secretary/Treasurer)
  • Charlie Gray (Executive Director)

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 2018. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Greater Albuquerque Innkeeper's Association is a non-profit organization whose membership is comprised of hotels, motels, Bed and Breakfasts (B&B), and the businesses who cater to them. The purpose of the Greater Albuquerque Innkeeper's Association is to educate its membership on issues and trends that impact the hospitality industry in Bernalillo, Sandoval and Valencia Counties; to monitor and support those hospitality marketing organizations that represent Albuquerque; and, to act as the voice of the hospitality industry of the Greater Albuquerque area for the purpose of communicating issues that affect our industry to the city, county and state governments, the general public, the state hotel/motel association and the tourism community

What it reported doing in 2018

Provides 10 luncheons per year for employees and leaders in the tourism industry for the purpose of networking and promoting tourism in New Mexico.

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 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 18
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.4%; rating input score 18
  • Program expense ratio: 18.1%; rating input score 18

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 34.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.9% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.4% of revenue deployed · 18.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $12K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2011 to 2018
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 18/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.