Consortium for Energy Environment and Demilitarization
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272999579
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2016
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2024664211
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Energy Resources Conservation and Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $62,964,398
- Expenses
- $67,466,729
- Assets
- $2,809,249
- Liabilities
- $6,505,556
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHARLES W MCBRIDE (PRESIDENT/CEO/DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- CHARLES W MCBRIDE (PRESIDENT/CEO/DIRECTOR): $435,888 total reported compensation
- JAMES W FRANKOVIC (COO): $424,063 total reported compensation
- MARY R REINECKE (CFO): $354,028 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide the federal government with rapid and efficient access to critical and cutting-edge scientific research and technology in the areas of energy, the environment and demilitarization through the use of a streamlined acquisition process.
What it reported doing in 2016
Research & prototype development for the department of defense - through its other transaction agreement with the department of the army, ceed provides a single-point acquisition mechanism for the federal government to more easily access the technologies offered by non-traditional, nonprofit, academic, small businesses and other entities in the defense industrial base.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
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: 98
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 72
- Sustainability: 13
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 97.3%; rating input score 97
- Fundraising efficiency: $230.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -7.2%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 2.32; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 37.2% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.9% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $65.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $436K · 9 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $42.2M reported
- Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2011 to 2016
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.