Napo Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 311601644
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2020
- Location
- Minneapolis, MN, USA
- Phone
- 6512883433
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $972,261
- Expenses
- $1,440,500
- Assets
- $490,123
- Liabilities
- $380,091
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MINDY GODDING (PRESIDENT)
- KAREN BAKER (PRESIDENT ELECT)
People named in this filing
- MINDY GODDING (PRESIDENT)
- KAREN BAKER (PRESIDENT ELECT)
- LAURIE NEUMANN (SECRETARY)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To empower members by providing quality education, fostering connections through a vibrant knowledge-sharing community, and offering opportunities to elevate their skills and expertise.
What it reported doing in 2024
Certification - cpo (certified professional organizers) certificationis a voluntary, industry-led effort that benefits the members of theorganizing profession, as well as the public. It is a recognition ofprofessionals who have met specific minimum standards, and proventhrough examination and client interaction that they possess the bodyof knowledge and experience required for certification. This programrecognizes and raises industry standards, practices and ethics. Forthe public, while the cpo designation is not an endorsement orrecommendation, certification of professional organizers maximizes thevalue received from the products and services provided by a cpo.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 17
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.6%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 61.1%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: -48.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.34; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.78; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.6% of revenue deployed · 61.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $880K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: SAM / OFAC restrictions: this organization returned a name match close enough to need a human check before a grant is released.