International Association of Firefighters A-0017

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
726019384
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020, Form 990-EZ 2011
Location
Shreveport, LA, USA
Phone
3184701316
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$422,663
Expenses
$466,367
Assets
$711,117
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHAD MAJOR (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHAD MAJOR (President): $48,600 total reported compensation
  • STACY BIRDWELL (Secretary/TREAS): $42,600 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promoting and improving the economic and working conditions of Louisiana firefighters

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.3%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.52; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.6%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.1% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $49K · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2012 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.