Concrete Advancement Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521680963
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7037064800
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chemistry, Chemical Engineering

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,111,884
Expenses
$2,689,799
Assets
$27,433,915
Liabilities
$163,491

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Julie Garbini (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Julie Garbini (President): $362,791 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Foundation is dedicated to enhancing and strengthening the concrete industry through independent research and quality education programming.

What it reported doing in 2025

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Concrete Sustainability Hub (MIT CSHub): The MIT CSHub brings together leaders from academia, industry, and government to develop breakthroughs using a holistic approach that will achieve durable and sustainable homes, buildings, and infrastructure in ever more demanding environments.The mission of the CSHub is to develop breakthroughs that will achieve sustainable and durable homes, buildings, and infrastructure. This is approached by conducting research to reduce the impact of producing and using concrete, and to develop tools to support infrastructure decisions: life-cycle environmental, cost, and hazard resistance.Research at the MIT CSHub has been organized around three focus areas: concrete materials science, building technology and the econometrics of sustainable development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 83% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -27.4%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.2; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 26 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $363K · 30 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.