International Zinc Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521722229
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
9192811870
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,423,184
Expenses
$9,089,606
Assets
$5,764,618
Liabilities
$2,021,997

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

Leadership & pay

47 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW GREEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $586,319 total reported compensation
  • ERIC VAN GENDEREN (DIRECTOR EHS): $238,712 total reported compensation
  • BERNARDO DURAN (MANAGER TMD): $180,621 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Iza provides a forum for the zinc industry to analyze and anticipate issues affecting zinc globally and to ensure a timely and appropriate response. Iza coordinates initiatives good for zinc that are best done collectively, undertaken either directly or through involvement and support of customer groups and related stakeholders on the local, regional and global levels.

What it reported doing in 2024

The galvanized automotive steel program (gap) was established to retain and grow the market for galvanized steel sheet on automotive bodies by technical innovation and market development. It has attracted significant support from the global steel industry, automakers, and steel industry suppliers who sponsor 95% of the gap budget. It is run in a series of 3-year terms, with 12 research projects in each term. It is estimated that the zinc market for automotive steels is over 700,000 tpy and that there is potential for an additional 50,000 tpy growth in developing countries. For example, there are opportunities in china and india to increase the percentage of galvanized steel used close to levels seen in north america or europe.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 43
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.5%; rating input score 98; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.9%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.2%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 39 of 40 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $586K · 47 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.