National Weather Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521050693
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Norman, OK, USA
Phone
4057015167
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$440,126
Expenses
$573,982
Assets
$148,823
Liabilities
$22,643

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANICE BUNTING (CEO)
  • BRYAN KARRICK (PRESIDENT)
  • BECCA MAZUR (PRESIDENT EL)

People named in this filing

  • JANICE BUNTING (CEO)
  • BRYAN KARRICK (PRESIDENT)
  • BECCA MAZUR (PRESIDENT EL)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The national weather association (nwa) is a member-led professional association connecting operational meteorologists in pursuit of excellence in weather forecasting, communication and service.

What it reported doing in 2024

Meteorology seal program - the national weather association (nwa) promotes the development of quality television, radio and internet weathercasting among nwa members. Through the nwa seal of approval program, the nwa grants television/radio and digital seals of approval to nwa member weathercasters in the broadcast media (tv/radio seal) and in cyberspace (digital seal) who meet or exceed standards set by the nwa. The nwa broadcast meteorology committee, with the approval of the nwa board, is responsible for the review and update of the seal of approval guidelines, qualifications, and procedures, to ensure the seal remains credible and relevant.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 71% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 90
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -30.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.26; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -48.8% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.4% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.