AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS St Louis Section

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510163408
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Reston, VA, USA
Phone
7032955109
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$147,928
Expenses
$113,328
Assets
$630,389
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melissa Rettig (President)
  • Shari Cunningham (President - Elect)
  • Melantha Norton (Past President)

People named in this filing

  • Melissa Rettig (President)
  • Shari Cunningham (President - Elect)
  • Melantha Norton (Past President)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

To advance the knowledge and practice of engineering in the public interest. To provide member societies with reliable information that affects the engineering profession. To provide a forum for engineering societies to exchange views on common interest. Conduct engineering programs and activities that member organizations individually could not accomplish that enhance and serve the public interest.

What it reported doing in 2024

The St.Louis Section host numerous technical seminars and presentations through the year. The technical meetings are held to inform the profession about the civil engineering issues and to inspire civil engineers to continually learn and grow throughout their careers. Educational programs presented are geared to enhance engineering abilities. All member dinners are held to encourage individuals learn more about their discipline and explore into different areas of expertise.

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 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - 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.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.8%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.56; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.8% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $113K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.