National Management Assoc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
756249981
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2017–2019
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Richardson, TX, USA
Phone
9727050039
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,936
Expenses
$34,268
Assets
$19,211
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jennifer Estrada (President)
  • Syed Haque (Vice President)
  • Ron Robertson (Vice President - American Enterprise & Youth)
  • Sue Paris (Co-Vice President American Enterprise & Youth)
  • Christine Stout (Vice President Awards & Recognition)
  • Charlotte Maples (Vice President - Special Events)

People named in this filing

  • Erioc O'Halloren (Chairman BOD)
  • Jennifer Estrada (President)
  • Syed Haque (Vice President)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Rockwell National Management Association - Dallas Chapter was established in 1976 in order to develop a professional spirit and understanding of management as a profession, to provide opportunity for development of leadership and managerial skills through practice, to provide opportunity for exchange of ideas and information on management practices and to encourage the spirit of unity and cooperation among managers at all levels. The Chapter is a nonprofit corporation under Section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code and is an affiliate of the National Management Association based in Dayton, Ohio.

What it reported doing in 2019

General Membership Approximately 171 members

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.7%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 43.6% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2017 to 2019
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.