Csab Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133317248
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Annapolis, MD, USA
Phone
4438377098
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$411,780
Expenses
$263,121
Assets
$1,592,919
Liabilities
$9,167

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL LEIDIG (PRESIDENT)
  • MIHAELA SABIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MARY JANE WILLSHIRE-FAIRLEY (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW PHILLIPS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDREW PHILLIPS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $107,833 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Csab, inc. Is the lead society within abet for accreditation of programs in computer science, cybersecurity, information systems, data science, artificial intelligence / machine learning, software engineering and information technology, and is a cooperating society for accreditation of computer engineering, biological engineering, and information engineering technology.

What it reported doing in 2024

The general purpose of csab is to advance the development and practice of computing disciplines in the public interest through enhancement of quality educational degree programs in computing. As such, csab is the lead abet member society for accreditation of degree programs in computer science, cybersecurity, data science, information systems, information technology, artificial intelligence / machine learning, and software engineering. It is a co-lead society for cybersecurity engineering and systems engineering, and a cooperating society for biological engineering, computer engineering, and information engineering technology. In its lead society capacity, csab supports the ieee-cs, the acm, the asa, and informs, and it has responsibility for the development of accreditation criteria and for the selection, training, and assignment of program evaluators.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% 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 most voting board members are independent. 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: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 42.2%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 71.5%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 36.1%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.05; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 41%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 42.2% of revenue deployed · 71.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $188K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.