Wsia Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431601552
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8167413910
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,894,901
Expenses
$1,041,457
Assets
$17,073,419
Liabilities
$58,194

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRADY KELLEY (CEO & PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRADY KELLEY (CEO & PRESIDENT): $953,872 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 wsia education foundation is dedicated to encouraging the educational development of all those interested in the excess and surplus lines business, to creating an understanding, and overcoming the misperceptions of the excess and surplus lines market. (see sch o)the foundation's work includes the financial support of the education programs for wsia members; maintaining and improving the associate in surplus lines insurance (asli) designation program, which furthers the educational opportunities for members industry professionals; supporting of the am best company's annual review of the surplus lines segment, which is a valuable tool for the industry; administering student-focused educational programs, symposiums and scholarship to encourage, support and reward exceptional students interested in an insurance career; and significant university outreach to attract bright new talent to the industry.

What it reported doing in 2025

Am best study: the organization underwrites the research and publication of the annual review on the surplus lines industry. The first edition was released in the fall of 1994 and a new edition is released each year. This publication has become the most quoted source on surplus lines insurance and provides a great deal of positive insightful information about this segment of the insurance industry. In addition, the organization provides a grant for the annual am best webinar that is conducted each fall which includes a panel of industry leaders in the surplus lines sector of the u.s. Insurance market. The panel reviews the market and provides a highlight of the newest edition of the report.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 79
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.4%; rating input score 93; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95%; rating input score 95; 28th 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 45%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.39; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.8%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 20 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $865K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $954K · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.