Advanced Technology International Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
994108615
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Summerville, SC, USA
Phone
8437603486
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonprofit Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,727,503
Expenses
$934,059
Assets
$12,634,474
Liabilities
$149,674

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Gerardina Pelto (Board Trustee, Executive Director and Board Secretary)

Highest reported compensation

  • Christopher Van Metre (Board Trustee): $739,987 total reported compensation
  • Mica Dolan (Board Chair): $673,172 total reported compensation
  • Gerardina Pelto (Board Trustee, Executive Director and Board Secretary): $152,249 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The ATI Foundation exists to build stronger communities by eliminating barriers to workforce success, empowering individuals to realize their full potential and thrive in meaningful careers. It funds, connects, and amplifies initiatives that provide training, career pathways, and sustainable economic solutions. The goal isn't just to help individuals; it's to create a workforce ecosystem where businesses, schools, and job seekers all succeed together. The Foundation's activities include charitable giving, grantmaking in support of education and workforce development projects, and mobilizing volunteers to support our communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Advanced Technology International Foundation is a public benefit corporation, and it is organized for charitable, educational, and scientific purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations described under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or corresponding section of any future federal tax code to perform the functions of, or carry out the purposes of, ATI, and in this connection: (a) Extend the reach of ATI's impact by improving the quality of life in the state and local communities where ATI employees and partners are located. (b) Provide opportunities for under-represented populations, by supporting workforce development efforts that are important to the U.S. industrial base. (c) Enable the business, economic and social ecosystems that help influence positive and meaningful outcomes for stakeholders of Foundation programs and the public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 33
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 8.2%; rating input score 8
  • Program expense ratio: 94.4%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5,814.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 6th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 67.7%; rating input score 68; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 25%; rating input score 25; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 92%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.53; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.5%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 8.2% of revenue deployed · 94.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $882K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $740K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 8/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 25/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.