The National Association for Regulatory Administration

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
541542015
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Phone
8886747052
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$929,203
Expenses
$1,150,918
Assets
$719,901
Liabilities
$92,737

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DONNA SABO (PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELLE THOMAS (PRESIDENT EL)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES MURPHY (EXECUTIVE DI): $192,924 total reported compensation
  • SONYA STEVENS (PROJECT MANA): $122,501 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 the health and safety of children and adults in regulated settings.

What it reported doing in 2025

Online courses for continuing professional education in human care licensing including introduction to regulatory enforcement, phases of licensing, investigation and evidence, balanced use of authority, managing complaints and suppressing illegal operations, history, rule-making and ethics in human care regulation. If a candidate successfully completes all four courses and passes the exam with a 75% or better, the candidate is eligible to apply for the nara national regulatory professional credential. The nara credential is the only national certification for human care licensors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 91% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -23.9%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $947K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 9 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $113K reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.