Naifa-Virginia

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
540617310
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Henrico, VA, USA
Phone
8047476020
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$115,842
Expenses
$118,663
Assets
$270,601
Liabilities
$35,998

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SUSAN M CAMPBELL (President & CEO)
  • SCOTT E PETTYJOHN (President-Elect)
  • TIMOTHY D WESTERMAN (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • SUSAN M CAMPBELL (President & CEO)
  • SCOTT E PETTYJOHN (President-Elect)
  • TIMOTHY D WESTERMAN (Vice President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

01. Form 990 governing body review (part vr, line 11)form 990 is reviewed by executive director and cpa prior to fling. After filing it is made available to all officers and board members.02. Ceo, executive director, top management comp (part vr, line 15a)executive directors position is reviewed annually by the personnel committee for performance, salary, and benefits.03. Governing documents, etc., available to public (park vr, line 19)documents are made available to the public upon request and authorization of the board.

What it reported doing in 2022

Convention for members held to provide learning opportunities, networking, and improvement of skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 73% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 17
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.7%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 18.3%; rating input score 18
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 8th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.28; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.7% of revenue deployed · 18.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2022
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.