International Association of Fire Fighters

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
231167682
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Philadelphia, PA, USA
Phone
2154404400
Rating
31
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,888,016
Expenses
$3,926,522
Assets
$10,800,378
Liabilities
$1,324,532

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Bresnan (President)
  • Tommy McKiernan (1st Vice President)
  • Chuck McQuilkin (Prior Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael Bresnan (President): $207,308 total reported compensation
  • Brian Coughlin (Treasurer): $86,415 total reported compensation
  • Tommy McKiernan (1st Vice President): $74,116 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The objectives are to secure adequate remuneration, for the betterment of conditions, for a higher degree of efficiency, to improve the standards for moral, social and economic standards, the cultivation of good fellowship among its members.

What it reported doing in 2024

To organzie workers for the economic moral and social advancement of their condition and status. Local 22 represents the interests of more than 4,000 current and retired Fire Fighters, Paramedics and Officers of the Philadelphia Fire Department.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 18
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80.7%; rating input score 81; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19.7%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.75; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $207K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 16 of 34 current checks pass · 18 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX BenefitsToMembers column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticOrgs column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PaymentsToAffiliates column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.