West Virginia Public Accountants Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 556024615
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2016
- Forms available
- Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2016
- Location
- Charleston, WV, USA
- Phone
- 3048646618
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $15,441
- Expenses
- $14,756
- Assets
- $10,166
- Liabilities
- $16,251
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JOHN M COOPER EA (President & CEO)
- JASON STAATS CPA (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- WILLIAM SHEETS (Director)
- JOHN LAW CPA (Director)
- FRANCIS ARMSTRONG EA (Secretary)
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
The promotion of a cpe program designed for professional growth, continuous contact with the internal revenue service and the wv state tax department regarding legislation affecting the profession and acting as a practitioner's advocate with regard to the IRS, the wv state tax department, legislative bodies, and other governmental agencies and departments.
What it reported doing in 2016
During fy 2016-2017, the wvpaa hosted 3 continuing education opportunities for cpas, eas, accounting and tax professionals, and lawyers. 16 hours, including 2 hours of ethics, in november 2016, 8 hours in dec 2016, and 11 hours in june 2017 at the assiciation annual convention. During the rest of the year, the membership monitored federal and state legislation to keep abreast of any changes.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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: 82
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.4%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.6; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -50.1% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 53.8% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- 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.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 4/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.