Credential Engine Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813389623
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022570279
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Higher Education Institutions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,048,962
Expenses
$4,373,042
Assets
$4,663,964
Liabilities
$109,341

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT CHENEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT CHENEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO): $371,201 total reported compensation
  • JEANNE KITCHENS (CHIEF TECHNICAL SERVICES O): $255,197 total reported compensation
  • DEBORAH EVERHART (CHIEF STRATEGY OFFICER): $233,599 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 map the credential landscape with clear and consistent information, fueling the creation of resources that empower people to find the pathways that are best for them. Credential engine provides a suite of web-based services that creates for the first time a centralized credential registry to house up-to-date information about all credentials, the credential transparency description language (ctdl) a common description language to enable credential comparability, and a platform to support customized applications to search and retrieve information about credentials.

What it reported doing in 2024

Policy - as requested, credential engine educates and supports policy makers at institution, system, state, federal, and national levels so they can craft guidance, regulation, funding, procurement, or legislative actions to advance credential transparency.

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 99% 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 - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.8%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $41.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 23rd 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 13.4%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 44.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.8% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $371K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $438K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 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 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.