Stand Up Paddle Industry Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461087496
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2016–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Dana Point, CA, USA
Phone
8885161314
Rating
35
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$103,790
Expenses
$91,737
Assets
$27,565
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kristin Thomas (Executive Director/Independent Consultant)
  • Tyler Callaway (President, Board of Directors)
  • Holly Evans (Vice President, Board of Directors)

People named in this filing

  • Kristin Thomas (Executive Director/Independent Consultant)
  • Becky Ladner (Member Relations/Independent Consultant)
  • Tyler Callaway (President, Board of Directors)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Stand Up Paddle Industry Association (SUPIA) is the trade organization of all stand up paddle businesses: Manufacturers, Retailers, Service Providers (Instructors, Guides, Race Directors, Event Planners, Certifiers), Media, Sales Reps, Distributors, Suppliers, etc.

What it reported doing in 2016

SUPIA strives to move the stand up paddleboard Industry forward in a positive direction, while improving each member's individual business. In 2016, our Association worked hard to create deliverables that our Membership could implement immediately. Examples include the creation of Industry standard safety waivers and warning labels. We also went though a very large website rebuild that allows us to better connect with our membership and that provides a much more robust resource to Members in terms of access to research, membership profiles, directory access as well as more opportunities to promote Members' products and services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 82
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.6%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.