Nassau County School Facilities Associat Ion Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832261988
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Bellmore, NY, USA
Phone
5166687385
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Reported finances

Revenue
$225,786
Expenses
$236,366
Assets
$259,729
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JON SIMPKINS (PRESIDENT)
  • CRAIG CAMMARATA (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • SAM CARDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES O'BEIRNE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN HALL (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES O'BEIRNE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $21,000 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 nassau county school facilities association, inc. Is committed to the profession of educational facilities management and the creation of lifetime learners. Our primary objective is to afford our members continued opportunities for professional growth and development. Our mission is to support educational excellence by providing nassau students with the safest facilities and creating optimal environments for learning.

What it reported doing in 2024

The nassau county school facilities association, inc. Provides a variety of major benefits to their membership. These benefits include professional development, mentorship, legal services through our affilation with the school administrators association of New York state, training for facilities staff, workshops, vendor showcases, monthly meetings with guest speakers, cooperative bidding program, listserv, forum for asking questions, database, and webpage.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $49.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 58.3%; rating input score 58; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -4.7%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.1; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.9% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $195K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $21K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 58/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.