International Alliance of Theatrical Stage IATSE

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133631123
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Austin, TX, USA
Phone
5123853466
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,231,416
Expenses
$1,638,792
Assets
$4,179,432
Liabilities
$119,580

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John Navarro (President 2625)
  • Christopher Simpson (President 25)

Highest reported compensation

  • Brandon Noack (Bus Mgr 2625): $148,833 total reported compensation
  • Laura King (Past Business Mgr): $45,012 total reported compensation
  • Susan Gaedke McGill (Treasurer 2625): $22,346 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We represent multiple crafts behind the camera involved in the making of motion pictures, television and video production. Our goal is to improve wages, hours, job security & working conditions. With collective bargaining, our objective is to obtain benefits for film technicians.

What it reported doing in 2025

Encouraging the Texas and Oklahoma Legislative bodies to incentivize film projects in these states. Union members work with Lawmakers to create incentives to bring productions to Texas and Oklahoma. These incentives offer rebates on in state spending to film production companies shooting in Texas and Oklahoma, bringing work and increasing economies of both states.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 70% for direct work, 3% for grants, and 27% for member benefits.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.6%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 59.3%; rating input score 59; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.6%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.55; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.6% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $149K · 27 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.