American Modeling Teachers Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
542179316
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2012
Location
Sacramento, CA, USA
Phone
4802135687
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$293,021
Expenses
$327,907
Assets
$234,570
Liabilities
$38,900

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • David Bates (Past President)
  • Brenda Royce (President)
  • Emma Mitchell (President Elect)
  • Urska Manners (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Raymond Howanski (Executive Officer): $58,583 total reported compensation
  • Sue Rea (Member Services Coordinator): $31,900 total reported compensation
  • Mary Colleen Megowan Romanowicz (Chief Financial Officer): $16,021 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providing professional development designed to help teachers implement Modeling InstructionTM in their classrooms.

What it reported doing in 2025

As of 12/31/2025 there are approximately 1675 members of AMTA who are served by two websites. This virtual teacher community is connected via 5 google groups, and multiple social media platforms. Members have access to an extensive library of curriculum resources, multiple monthly webinars, podcasts distance learning courses and summer workshops for physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, and mathematics for middle and high school teachers and introductory university teachers. AMTA websites average over 400 hits a day. In addition AMTA works with STEM teacher alliances in Phoenix, Cleveland, Mass Bay, Michigan and Wisconsin who have organized to offer Modeling Workshops for teachers in their regions.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 90% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 95.5% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $274K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $59K · 14 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D other liabilities reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.