Sea Services Leadership Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521393858
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2007
- Location
- Arlington, VA, USA
- Phone
- 2033647357
- Rating
- 50
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Military, Veterans' Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $752,647
- Expenses
- $661,912
- Assets
- $259,661
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BREANNA STRAND (President)
- AMY THOMAS (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- KATHERINE LAZENBY (Treasurer)
- REKIYA JANSSEN (SENIOR ADVISOR)
- BREANNA STRAND (President)
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
SSLAs mission is to support women in the sea services through access to education resources mentoring and networking opportunities to enhance their leadership potential and increase the effectiveness of the organizations in which they serve. These organizations include the United States Navy Marine Corps Coast Guard and the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration NOAA Commissioned Corps. SSLA also supports the United States Army Air Force Space Force and the Public Health Service PHS through volunteer opportunities membership and the annual Joint Womens Leadership Symposium in which they participate. See Schedule O for additional information.
What it reported doing in 2024
SSLAs mission is to support women in the sea services through access to education resources mentoring and networking opportunities. SSLA executes this mission annually through the development and execution of the Joint Womens Leadership Symposium JWLS a multi-day conference that sees attendance from 1100-1500 individuals across all eight of the USs uniformed services as well as international participants and guests. SSLA also hosts an annual membership meeting for those with SSLA membership to pass important information on the governance and services of the organization.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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: 92
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 60
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; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $273K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 40 current checks pass · 7 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesManagement column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.