National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710569634
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$96,511
Expenses
$81,106
Assets
$293,487

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RENEE DAVIS (President)
  • ELIZABETH McCLOUD (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES SNIDER (PRESIDENT ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • RENEE DAVIS (President)
  • BRENDA ZASTOUPIL (Secretary)
  • TAMIKA BRASWELL (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nassgap is dedicated to the promotion, strength, encouragement, and enhancement of high standards in the administration and operation of student grant and aid programs so that these programs shall be available to students in all states to expand and further postsecondary educational opportunities. Its membership is drawn from single agencies in each state or territory which are responsible for state-funded student aid programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Annual survey of all higher education financial aid provided by states to students attending college. This survey is used at the state level by legislators, governors, and other policy makers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.62; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $69K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.