International Fire Suppression Alliance Ltd

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522154784
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2009
Location
Green Bay, WI, USA
Phone
9142825081
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$606,418
Expenses
$834,098
Assets
$1,877,971
Liabilities
$276,434

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK FESSENDEN (MANAGING DIR): $172,695 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote and enhance the business of manufacturing and installing water based fire suppression equipment in countries and regions outside of the united states and canada

What it reported doing in 2024

In response to grant request ifsa awarded national fire suppression network (nfsn) of the u.k. 18,000 to continue the established and strategic political link into government through the nfsn parliamentary liaison officer. This funding ensures continuity of advocacy for water suppression systems at the heart of government decision making at a time of anticipated government changes. In response to grant request ifsa awarded british automatic fire sprinkler association (bafsa) 15,000 to secure a sponsorship of their annual general meeting and dinner. Ifsa will be provided a speaking slot and receive recognition during the conference and dinner. In response to grant request ifsa awarded latam pci 15,000 to fund a regional study of regulatory status in latin america. The primary goal is to understand mandatory implementation and population coverage of nfpa and other "suppression" fire codes and standards within the region. In response to grant request ifsa awarded latam pci 12,000 to create a trilingual platform that serves as the primary communication channel and source of fire protection information in latin america.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and program spending has grown recently. 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: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.2%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 27.1%; rating input score 27
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -37.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.25; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 33.1% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.2% of revenue deployed · 27.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $226K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $173K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.