Nassau Alcohol Crime Drug Abatement Coalition Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 542076506
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2017
- Forms available
- Form 990 2017, Form 990-N 2010
- Location
- Fernandina Beach, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9042773699
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $866,896
- Expenses
- $926,506
- Assets
- $132,835
- Liabilities
- $27,264
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- SUSAN WOODFORD (EXECUTIVE DI): $126,244 total reported compensation
- KARRIN CLARK (EXECUTIVE DI): $20,338 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Nacdac seeks to educate and communicate with the general public, community organizations and community-serving organizations that work with youth, to eliminate drug, tobacco and alcohol use and at the same time reduce associated criminal behavior.
What it reported doing in 2017
Nacdac educates and communicates with the general public, community organizations and community serving organizations that work with youth to eliminate drug, tobacco and alcohol use and at the same time reduce associated criminal behavior. Nacdac envisions that the young people of nassau county (between the ages of 11 and 18) will embrace positive life choices for drug, alcohol, and tobacco free bodies and minds and remain substance free, thereby developing into active and productive citizens.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 17
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 90.9%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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: 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: -6.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.9% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 90.9% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $788K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2013 to 2017
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.