Center for Automotive Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010779978
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
7346621287
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,731,015
Expenses
$2,715,322
Assets
$2,567,318
Liabilities
$2,469,880

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALAN AMICI (PRESIDENT AND CEO JAN-SEP)
  • DAVID LECKEY (INTERIM CEO OCT-DEC)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALAN AMICI (PRESIDENT AND CEO JAN-SEP): $221,600 total reported compensation
  • K VENKATESH PRASAD (SENIOR VP OF RESEARCH): $170,603 total reported compensation
  • CHERIE VAN ALLEN (TREASURER, V-P OF OPERATIONS): $125,759 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To inform and advise, through independent research, education and dialogue, enabling a more viable and sustainable automotive ecosystem.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conferences: the center for automotive research conducts conferences on automotive industry trends, technology and manufacturing. The most significant conference offered is the car management briefing seminars (mbs). The mbs has taken place annually for more than 50 years. In addition to providing up-to-date information on automotive related topics, the seminars provide networking opportunities to participants and promotes the sharing of ideas. In addition to the mbs, car conducts other regional and local automotive related conferences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 62%; rating input score 62
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.44 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: Limited
  • 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: 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.7%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 62% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $394K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.