Ohio Security Traders Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 341417516
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2013–2014
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2014
- Location
- Cleveland, OH, USA
- Phone
- 2169201418
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $78,700
- Expenses
- $87,460
- Assets
- $22,295
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SEAN BURKE (PRESIDENT)
- JOHN HELTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KATHY HUTKA (PAST PRESIDENT)
- GEFFREY GIOIA (PAST PRESIDENT & STA GOVERNOR REP)
People named in this filing
- SEAN BURKE (PRESIDENT)
- JOHN HELTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JULIE K WARING (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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The object of this association is to promote the general welfare of its members, to establish, and maintain high standards of ethical conduct, to provide the benefits to be derived from industry networking, and to expand education opportunities for trading professionals in the securities business. We as an organization also recognize our responsibility to give back to our society by fostering charitable giving of our organization.
What it reported doing in 2014
Summer outing: the Ohio sta annual summer outing is the main event of the year for the organization. Most of the sponsors, members, and guests from around the country attend this event, with an average attendance of 110 people. Ohio sta structures the event to cater to the purposes of education, networking, and charity. The event includes dinner/speakers/vegas night, followed by a golf outing.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, 32% for grants, and 4% for member benefits.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.3%; rating input score 92
- Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -11.1%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -32.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.3% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $73K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.