The Zone Five Regional Law Enforcement Training Ce

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141791290
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Schenectady, NY, USA
Phone
5183932707
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$457,770
Expenses
$442,425
Assets
$881,672
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FRANK FRANKOSKI (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • ERIC CLIFFORD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHAEL WOODS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CHIEF ROCCO FRAGOMENI (DIRECTOR)
  • FRANK FRANKOSKI (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • ERIC CLIFFORD (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

In service law enforcement training

What it reported doing in 2025

The training center was established in 1988 to service police agencies from nine counties in upstate New York including albany, rensselaer, schenectady, schoharie, saratoga, fulton, montgomery, warren and Washington. In 1996 the zone five regional training academy was officially formed as a 501(c)3 organization to better service and train its police forces within these counties. The training center provides on going and in service training to police recruits and police officers of city and county police departments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.99; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $357K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.