Auto-isac Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475237220
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 7038615417
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Business and Industry
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,898,599
- Expenses
- $6,814,186
- Assets
- $10,403,067
- Liabilities
- $1,057,820
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- FAYE FRANCY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- FAYE FRANCY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $555,801 total reported compensation
- JOSHUA POSTER (PROGRAM OPERATIONS MANAGER): $218,010 total reported compensation
- MICHAEL SHOKOUHI (BUSINESS OPERATIONS MANAGER): $189,558 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 auto-isac is to serve the global automotive industry as a central point for the analysis and sharing of trusted and timely cyber threat information about existing or potential cyber-related threats and vulnerabilities for the connected vehicle. Our membership includes light- and heavy-duty vehicles, commercial vehicle fleets and carriers.
What it reported doing in 2024
As defined by the national council of isacs (nci), an information sharing and analysis center (isac) is a trusted, sector-specific membership organization that provides operational capabilities for its sector or industry. These capabilities often include, but are not limited to, the collection, analysis, and dissemination of alerts, incident reports, and other intelligence regarding cyber and physical threats and vulnerabilities. An isac typically provides an electronic, trusted capability for its membership to exchange and share information on threats that assist the membership in defending its respective components of critical infrastructure. Service accomplishments include 1) sharing intelligence across the community. We held analyst's regular meetings and workshops quarterly and established a community outreach to the automotive partners; 2) fostering industry maturing through best practices (guides), partnerships, community engagement; 3) robust sharing and discussion on the analyst secure portal: 4) design of an annual summit to share the accomplishments; 5) isac table top exercises for analysts and senior executives.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 94% 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
- 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: 50
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -15.5%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 26%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $556K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 10 of 10 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.