Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 901026165
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Altamonte Springs, FL, USA
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $299,238
- Expenses
- $215,133
- Assets
- $564,164
- Liabilities
- $39,330
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tonya Wade (Executive Director)
- Henrik Andersson (Immediate past president)
- Vic Adamowica (President)
- Caroline Cecot (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Tonya Wade (Executive Director)
- Rob Moore (Assistant Treasurer)
- Ann Wolverton (Director)
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
The Association is dedicated to the advancement, exchange of ideas, and research related to benefit-cost analysis, cost effectiveness analysis, risk-benefit analysis, applied welfare economic analysis, and damage assessment.
What it reported doing in 2024
Journal - as part of the SBCA membership benefits, all SBCA members are given a free subscription to the journal of benefit cost analysis (JBCA). JBCA is the only journal devoted exclusively to benefit-cost analysis, the leading evidence based anaytical method for determining if the consequences of specific public actions make society better off overall. JBCA publishes theory, empirical analysis, case studies, and techniques. Applications include social programs related to education, crime, health, poverty, labor and housing as well as regulations and projects related to the environment, natural resources, transportation, safety, and security. The interdisciplinary nature, with contributions from a wide range of disciplines and areas of public policy, is unique. JBCAs mission is to expand the use of serious, state of the art BCA by individuals and groups who make public policy decisions, those who advise, and those who implement the projects, programs, and policies. By serving as a bridge, the JBCA serves an important role that few other journals provide.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 - 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: 28
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 26.5%; rating input score 27
- Program expense ratio: 38.6%; rating input score 39
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 28.1%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.62; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -13.3% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 26.5% of revenue deployed · 38.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $83K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
- Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2016 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 27/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.