Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237371928
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
2026406591
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$149,697
Expenses
$126,674
Assets
$382,900
Liabilities
$862

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KARA NELSON (PRESIDENT)
  • JOSE CERRATO CORRALES (PRESIDENT -)

People named in this filing

  • WILLIAM JACKSON (VICE PRESIDE)
  • KARA NELSON (PRESIDENT)
  • JOSE CERRATO CORRALES (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To assist its members in the development and dissemination of knowledge in environmental engineering and science. Aeesp seeks to strengthen and advance the discipline of environmental engineering by providing leadership, promoting cooperation amongst academic and others within and outside the discipline, and serving as a liaison between its membership and other professional societies, governmental agencies, industry and nonprofit organizations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conferences: support of distinguished lectures at educational conferences and guest lectures at universities facilitates the communication of advancements in environmental engineering and science research and education and stimulates collaboration among scientists on future research projects. Education and outreach: created webinars, factsheets, infographics and other resources to educate stakeholders on the use of biomass for thermal energy and combined heat and power.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.4%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.02; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.