Sheet Metal Contractors Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510214364
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Phone
8014868449
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$378,312
Expenses
$462,988
Assets
$1,715,333
Liabilities
$2,967

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STERLING JENSEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROCHELLE LESTER (EXECUTIVE DI): $113,490 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promote and assist the sheet metal industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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: 80
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 34
  • 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: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 74.3%; rating input score 74; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -22.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.7; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $113K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 17 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.