Construction Management Association of America Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311044306
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Vienna, VA, USA
Phone
7033562622
Rating
50
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,755,458
Expenses
$7,092,337
Assets
$5,064,175
Liabilities
$1,930,975

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREA RUTLEDGE (PRESIDENT AN)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREA RUTLEDGE (PRESIDENT AN): $345,467 total reported compensation
  • LAURA SKOFF (VP, OPERATIO): $207,290 total reported compensation
  • MARK GEDRIS (VP, MARKETIN): $185,578 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cmaa is the voice of the program and construction management industry and the premier resource for professionals working in the built environment.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cmci - as an independent entity of cmaa, the construction manager certification institute (cmci) administers construction management credentialing programs. They are: 1) the ansi-accredited certified construction manager (ccm) credentialing program that re/certifies hundreds of ccms each year. This designation is based on education and mastery of the critical skills of construction management, 2) the certified associate construction manager (cacm), which is a mid-career credential offering an opportunity to be recognized prior to achieving the ccm, and 3) the construction manager-in-training (cmit) certificate program provides an entry pathway for early career professionals to become successful construction managers. The cmit allows the credential holder to show their supervisor that they are continuing their career growth. Cmci promotes the recognition of its programs as the reliable indicator of professional qualification and accomplishment to the industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 27 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $345K · 33 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $955K reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.