Center for Technology Commercialization

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043134046
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2019
Location
Westborough, MA, USA
Phone
5082439720
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Engineering and Technology

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$86,303
Expenses
$42,555
Assets
$21,438
Liabilities
$64,549

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS J KENNEDY (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS J KENNEDY (CEO): $9,343 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Technology transfer

What it reported doing in 2019

Assessments and feasibility studies for regionalization of 911 public safety answering point (psap) centers and other public safety government services. Ctc has the capability to assess the performance of a wide variety of public safety agencies to identify the feasibility of consolidating or regionalizing those services with other government entities.program and project management - ctc has exceptional skills and extensive experience in program support and project management at the local, state and federal government for projects that support the state and local public safety community.information sharing solutions for government agencies and their industry partners that include: meeting, workshop, and conference planning and management. Ctc has personnel with extensive expertise in providing management of national- and regional-level homeland security/public safety events.market and technology assessments - knowledge is power and making intelligent business decisions relies on solid, reliable market research. Ctc performs market and technology assessments, which can be performed as a stand-alone service or can be followed by a focus group to collect user requirements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 49.3%; rating input score 49
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 50.7%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 3.01; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -32.6% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -28.2% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -27.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 49.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $43K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $9K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2019
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.