Aero Institute Aerospace Education & Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161761035
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2017
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Palmdale, CA, USA
Phone
6615852175
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Physical & Earth Sciences,

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,668,230
Expenses
$2,688,449
Assets
$2,595,524
Liabilities
$163,218

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Kim Shaw (Operations Mngr): $144,776 total reported compensation
  • Amber Abel (Manager): $135,314 total reported compensation
  • Curtis Cannon (Secretary): $90,404 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To make educational opportunities more accessible in the antelope valley by providing comprehensive technical undergraduate and graduate education. To conduct leading edge aerospace research: incubate, stimulate and commercialize new intellectual property; promote aerospace science and engineering.

What it reported doing in 2017

To make educational opportunities more accessible in the antelope valley by providung comprehensive technical undergraduate and graduate education. To conduct leading edge aerospace research: incubate, stimulate and commercialize new intellectual property; promote aerospace science and engineering.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 45
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $145K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2013 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.
  • High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.