Regional Air Alliance of West Michigan

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264346543
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Phone
6165756545
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,015
Expenses
$148,310
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD DEVOS JR (PRESIDENT)
  • DANIEL WIERSMA (VICE-PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIEL WIERSMA (VICE-PRESIDENT): $95,317 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Regional air alliance of west Michigan (raawm) was incorporated on february 25, 2009 as a not-for-profit irc 501(c)(3) corporation with a mission to study, research, analyze and investigate matters related to commercial air service in western Michigan. Raawm was established with the intent to hypothesize, experiment, analyze and evaluate the impact improved commercial air service has on the macro-economic, quality of life implications of the residents and businesses in the region. The information so derived is then disseminated, and the results and findings made available to educate and inform key policymakers and members of the general public about important issues relating to commercial air service and its relationship to the community.

What it reported doing in 2013

The regional air alliance of west Michigan continued to pursue, to varying degrees, each of its primary organizational objectives that were originally set out at its formation. In particular, the focus areas were two: 1) efforts to facilitate the continued west Michigan commercial air service of southwest airlines following the review of the operating history of airtran airways (which was acquired by southwest airlines) and, 2) efforts to better research the passenger marketplace and how the gerald r ford international airport could improve on its delivered passenger experience (including; facility review, service review, concessions, etc.)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 40
  • Sustainability: 6
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -196.5%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 64.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $148K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 1 filing year from 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.