International Society of Wheelchair Professionals

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
862911321
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Moon Township, PA, USA
Phone
4123344106
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$389,459
Expenses
$367,287
Assets
$279,577
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALEX KAMADU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALEX KAMADU (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $161,183 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To serve as a global resource for wheelchair service standards and provision through advocacy, education, standards, evidence-based practice, innovation and a platform for information exchange.

What it reported doing in 2025

Continue wheelchair service standards initiatives and continue to lead wheelchair service provider certifications. Furthermore, iswp holds monthly meetings, support academic training partners, provide online training modules and tests, and build relationships with leadership in the industry. Furthermore, iswp advocates for countries to improve the quality and access of wheelchairs and services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 51
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 88.1%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.7%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.76; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 43.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -26.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.2% of revenue deployed · 88.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $323K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $161K · 16 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.