Michigan Association of School Boards

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381323441
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Lansing, MI, USA
Phone
5173275900
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,338,512
Expenses
$7,238,565
Assets
$13,176,932
Liabilities
$1,924,773

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DONALD HUBLER (DIRECTOR (NSBA PAST PRESIDENT))
  • JAMES JOHNSON (PRESIDENT)
  • PAMELA DICKENSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DALE WINGERD (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • STEPHEN J HYER (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DONALD P WOTRUBA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONALD P WOTRUBA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $400,603 total reported compensation
  • BRAD BANASIK (LEGAL COUNSEL): $212,941 total reported compensation
  • KENT CARTWRIGHT (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $207,303 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Michigan association of school boards is to provide high-quality educational leadership services for all Michigan boards of education, and to advocate for an equitable and exceptional public education for all students.

What it reported doing in 2024

Leadership services: includes activities that enhance leadership skills, provide training, and support the role of school board members in Michigan. This includes services such as superintendent search, workshops, conferences and seminars that provide access to information necessary to fulfill the obligations of the role of elected school board members, knowledge and networking to enhance board members skills and effectiveness. Boards of education served: 632

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 27.3%; rating input score 27; 13th 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.82; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.1% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $5.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $401K · 30 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $187K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.