Asnt Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882513556
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbus, OH, USA
Phone
6142746003
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Science and Technology N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,004,504
Expenses
$561,203
Assets
$6,916,693
Liabilities
$202,885

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOHN IMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • DANNY KECK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NEAL COUTURE (CEO, TRUSTEE)

Highest reported compensation

  • NEAL COUTURE (CEO, TRUSTEE): $289,266 total reported compensation
  • JENNIFER NEALY WHEAT (CFAO, TREASURER): $197,730 total reported compensation
  • HEATHER COWLES (EXEC DIRECTOR, SECRETARY): $153,172 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 mission of the asnt foundation is to advance the field of nondestructive testing through research, scholarship, and workforce development.

What it reported doing in 2024

The asnt foundation advances the nondestructive testing (ndt) profession by strengthening the workforce pipeline and supporting innovation. The foundation provides scholarships and grants to students and early-career professionals to reduce barriers to education and training and help individuals complete ndt programs. It also funds and publishes industry researchincluding workforce and compensation insightsto inform employers, educators, and stakeholders and support data-driven advocacy for the profession. In addition, the foundation supports outreach initiatives that introduce youth and educators to ndt and related career pathways through resources, kits, and educational materials.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.5%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 51.1%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.12 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 44.1%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.32; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -94.5% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.5% of revenue deployed · 51.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $287K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $289K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.