New York State Library Assistants Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 141710526
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Oneonta, NY, USA
- Phone
- 6074362726
- Rating
- 86
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $14,634
- Expenses
- $15,437
- Assets
- $1,628
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHERYL MARRIOTT (President)
- LE'ANDRE PEOPLES (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- CHERYL MARRIOTT (President)
- LE'ANDRE PEOPLES (Vice President)
- HEATHER GAD (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
To enhance the professional image and status of New York state's library assistants and to further their professional growth. To provide a network for communication to the organization's members and the profession concerning library and library assistant issues and trends. To network and cooperate with library organizations on local, state, national and international levels.
What it reported doing in 2025
Provide annual conference for nys library assistants and to provide education, networking and communication among members.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 99
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 26
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 97.9%; rating input score 98
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -5.5%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 13; 13th 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: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -6.9% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 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.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.