Nalca

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
586043919
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Athens, GA, USA
Phone
7062834144
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,925
Expenses
$53,990
Assets
$13,738
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK D DANIEL (PRESIDENT/STEWARD)
  • MARSHALL VARNUM (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • PATRICK D DANIEL (PRESIDENT/STEWARD)
  • MARSHALL VARNUM (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHERRY K BROWNER (TREASURER)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

This is a nonprofit union organization.

What it reported doing in 2015

We are a union that provides assistant to carriers that have issues with different problems due to managers unman-aging skills.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% 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

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.