National Air Traffic Controllers Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521856897
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2018–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- San Diego, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8585375800
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $69,399
- Expenses
- $64,583
- Assets
- $61,383
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALEX CISNEROS (PRESIDENT)
- GEORGE NESTOJKO (VICE PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- ALEX CISNEROS (PRESIDENT)
- GEORGE NESTOJKO (VICE PRESIDENT)
- SHIRA O'CONNELL (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The organization is a labor union local operating under section 501(c)(5). Its purpose is to represent air traffic controllers in collective bargaining, contract enforcement, and workplace advocacy; to promote the professional interests of its members; and to provide member support, communication, and union-related activities.
What it reported doing in 2025
Provided representation to members in labor-management matters, grievance processing, and contract administration. Conducted member meetings and communications. Supported member engagement activities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 96
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.1%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 6.9%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 93.1% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $65K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.