Manatee Education Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237414891
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Bradenton, FL, USA
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$959,941
Expenses
$1,010,752
Assets
$299,129
Liabilities
$154,628

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The association is a labor union representing the interest of teachers paraprofessionals and students in manatee county f

What it reported doing in 2011

Return of authority to the classroom teacher Right of teachers to remove disruptive students Guaranteed planning for all teachers during the student day Pay for 100 of sick leave upon retirement Annual step increases pay for experience Development and update of evaluation instrument Establishment of a joint committee for review of all paperwork Sick Leave Bank Credit on the salary schedule for paras who become highly qualified Banking and voting time during duty ho urs

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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: 100
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 40

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; 60th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.7%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.9% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $90K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2009 to 2011
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.