The Friesian Horse Association of North America

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263964264
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lexington, KY, USA
Phone
8594557430
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$852,283
Expenses
$887,997
Assets
$469,323
Liabilities
$16,182

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIELLE PIASCIK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARQUIS LAUDE (PRESIDENT)
  • JOSHUA WENGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • JOSHUA WENGER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $46,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The friesian horse association of north america was established to further and promote the breeding of the friesian horse.

What it reported doing in 2025

The fhana also serves as the north american central point for the registration of friesian horses of the kfps. Fhana manages the official paper work from the kfps for their members in the united states and canada. Fhana also organizes the yearly inspection circuits for the inspectors and judges from the netherlands to come to the us and canada, to do yearly inspections of our horses here, to make sure that our breeding goals is aligned with theirs.at these yearly inspections, our foals and 3 and 4 year olds are evaluated and ranked within the overall breed population. Foals are given a first, second or third premium, or none at all. Older mares and geldings are rated similarly, with the top 35% being awarded a first or second premium "star". They can go from there, if selected, to the crown rating, then on to model, based on their conformation, performance and ability to pass a suitability test. That is a test that evaluates sport/riding/driving potential. A model mare must have also had a live foal.other premiums are available for the ability to pass their good genetics to offspring; a mare with four star offspring is considered to be a preferant mare. Horses of either sex can earn, with a set number of high scores in either riding or driving, a "sport" predicate. Mares with enough offspring doing well in sports can earn a "prestatie mare" predicate.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.2%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.2%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $46K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.