The Knitting Guild Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813004152
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Plano, TX, USA
Phone
2149232837
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$430,960
Expenses
$383,754
Assets
$405,974
Liabilities
$120,154

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • ARENDA HOLLADAY (PRES & EXEC DIR): $45,102 total reported compensation
  • MARY E JACOBS (Treasurer): $23,860 total reported compensation
  • DONNA ESTIN (VP-PR): $14,141 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Perpetuate traditional techniques and keep the artisan aspects and high quality standards of the craft alive.

What it reported doing in 2025

TKGA offers educational classes that are done remotely as correspondence courses via mail. There is a purchase price for classes which covers the S&H and a small teacher stipend.A cornerstone of TKGA is its Master Hand Knitting certification program, comprised of three levels. Knitters submit their knitting, writing, and technical knowledge to a panel of Master Hand Knitters for their review and comments. Upon successful completion of all three certification levels, the student becomes a Master Knitter. There is a purchase price for MHK Certification that covers S&H. The MHK review committee are volunteers and receive no stipend.TKGA had just under 4200 members in 2025.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 26
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.1%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 79.1% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $341K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.