Information Assurance Small Business Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770687523
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2014
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Columbia, MD, USA
Phone
4439834380
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Small Business Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$46
Expenses
$16,224
Assets
$58,954
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MR JED VAN DYKE (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MR JED VAN DYKE (PRESIDENT)
  • MR BRUCE HOWARD (SECRETARY)
  • MR CARL MUCKENHIRN (TREASURER)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's exempt purpose is to serve its members by providing a forum for the ethical exchange of information. The organization is dedicated to increasing knowledge in information assurance and technoloy through the exploration of issues relevant to its members and the communities they serve.

What it reported doing in 2014

The organization has over the past years held several forums to discuss the current issues to help bridge information assuarance technologies amoung government, industry and academic leaders worldwide. The organization also holds conventions which provide value and benefits to its members. The convention is a forum by which members and different communities of interest can share relevant information. During the 2014 year the organization did not hold events.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -35,169.6%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.63; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -99.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.2% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2012 to 2014
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.