Institute for Supply Management Alaska

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920096297
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Anchorage, AK, USA
Phone
9076466308
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,922
Expenses
$55,405
Assets
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARLYS HAGEN (PRESIDENT)
  • BEN MILAM (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ANNIE MESSER (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARLYS HAGEN (PRESIDENT)
  • TODD SANTANGELO (TREASURER)
  • BEN MILAM (PAST PRESIDENT)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Institute for supply management Alaska was organized to educate, develop, and advance the purchasing supply management professions in the state of Alaska.

What it reported doing in 2019

Institute for supply management Alaska usually conducts two seminars annually - spring and fall - that further enhance the purchasing management education in Alaska. Professional speakers and training events highlight the seminars and give purchasing managers the opportunity to network with others. This is the entity's final return and only the fall seminar was held..

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 8
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 9.6%; rating input score 10

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1,796.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -39.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -80.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -77.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 9.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 6 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2017 to 2019
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.