Asc Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 742871930
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Phone
- 5123948260
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $206,086
- Expenses
- $220,053
- Assets
- $219,805
- Liabilities
- $251,019
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- THOMAS SINGER (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS SINGER (CEO): $102,915 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 austin technology council is a diverse coalition of individuals and organizations dedicated to developing the austin community in the software industry. The council publishes newsletters, directories, mailing lists, conference materials, surveys, and statistical data for the purpose of educating, enlightening, or serving to promote the software industry. The council also conducts and sponsors conferences, seminars, short courses, and job fairs which educate and improve the employment possibilities of those with and within the software industry.
What it reported doing in 2025
Published newsletters, directories, mailing lists, conference materials, surveys, and statistical data and organized conferences, seminars, short courses, and job fairs to educate and improve the employment possibilities of those working with and within the software industry.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: -6.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.14; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 46.8%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 10 of 22 current checks pass · 12 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Interest column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
- Review — Grant Readiness: SAM / OFAC restrictions: this organization returned a name match close enough to need a human check before a grant is released.