Pennsylvania Trappers Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237378412
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Hummelstown, PA, USA
Phone
7172399267
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$222,692
Expenses
$183,109
Assets
$869,953
Liabilities
$729

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLIE SYKES (PRESIDENT)
  • TODD STROHECKER (VICE PRESIDENT EAST)
  • DON KLINGER (VICE PRESIDENT WEST)

Highest reported compensation

  • DONNA SPITTLE (TREASURER): $12,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is to develop leadership for the advancement of the best interest for the trapper and the fur industry and educate against cruelty in trapping.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization strives to educate the public, youth and novice trappers through training programs run by district offices. Additionally, the organization has a presence at county fairs, youth field days, and many other events sponsored by numerous outdoor organizations. The organization is intricately involved with the wildlife agency and the Pennsylvania game commission in all matters dealing with trapper training. In addition to personal training and interaction, the organization also provides educational materials and publications to numerous, state, county and local governments as well as to many youth groups such as boy scouts, girl scouts and future farmers of america. All training provided by the Pennsylvania trappers association, first and foremost, focuses on ethics and responsibility to wildlife, its habitats, fellow outdoor enthusiasts, and the general public. Our image is our future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 67% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 67
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 16.9%; rating input score 17; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95%; rating input score 95; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.8%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.75; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 71.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $130K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $12K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.