National Association of State Boating Law Administrators Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311545237
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Lexington, KY, USA
Phone
8592259487
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,852,974
Expenses
$3,902,924
Assets
$3,958,335
Liabilities
$2,628,070

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RON SARVER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RON SARVER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $143,318 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nasbla's mission is to strengthen the ability of the state and territorial boating authorities to reduce death, injury and property damage associated with recreational boating and ensure a safe, secure and enjoyable boating environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Public policy projects including: implementing the recreational boating safety strategic plan - nasbla and the states; boating accident investigation and reporting courses for maritime law enforcement; boating under the influence detection & enforcement courses for maritime law enforcement officers; the operation dry water campaign - a boating under the influence awareness and enforcement campaign; the boating safety education dashboard; the spring aboard campaign advocating for boaters to take a boating safety education course; the public health approach to boating safety; and staged boating collisions project to enhance boating accident investigation courses.

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: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.3%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.66; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $143K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $137K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.