ETS

Legal name: Educational Testing Service

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
210634479
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Princeton, NJ, USA
Phone
6099219000
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$792,021,950
Expenses
$756,388,237
Assets
$1,558,468,865
Liabilities
$223,669,009

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

Leadership & pay

47 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMIT SEVAK (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • PETER CHAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF IT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMIT SEVAK (PRESIDENT & CEO): $2,184,468 total reported compensation
  • RALPH TAYLOR-SMITHEND 1012024 (VP CORPORATE DEVELOPMENT): $1,215,956 total reported compensation
  • JEFFREY ALAN MELNICK (SVP & CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $1,085,784 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Advancing the science of measurement to power human progress. Certification testing solutions Flexible, scalable testing solutions for certification bodies. We partner across the assessment lifecycle, from innovative AI-driven test content development and AI-enhanced test security to flexible multimodal delivery, scoring, and reporting. We support Maintenance of Certification and the assessment of job-relevant skills. All delivered through a seamless, candidate-focused experience. Flexible, scalable testing solutions for certification bodies. LEARN MORE.

What it reported doing in 2024

Assessment research, development, and scoring educational testing service ("ets") conducts research on statistical and psychometric methodology to advance the science of educational measurement and ensure the technical quality and fairness of ets's assessments and assessment related services. Through its policy evaluation and research center, ets also conducts research and analyses that address challenging educational policy issues. In conjunction with its research, ets develops educational assessments for use by states in k-12 assessment, for college admissions and the transition from high school to college, for graduate and business school admissions, and for use in measuring knowledge and skills, promoting learning and performance, and supporting education and professional development. Ets has developed more than 200 assessment programs including but not limited to the praxis series, test of english as a foreign language (toefl), graduate record examination (gre), test of english for international communication (toeic), and state specific and pre-college assessments.in conjunction with its research, ets continues working collaboratively with the national center for education statistics (nces) on the national assessment of educational progress (naep). Additionally, ets's institute for student achievement (isa) continues working in partnership with districts and schools to transform underperforming high schools into rigorous and supportive learning environments that prepare students to be college ready.each year, ets scores and delivers millions of assessments and score reports to examinees and institutions, in numerous formats and using a variety of means.program service revenue decreased during fy2025 primarily due to reductions in assessment activity and program demand compared to the prior year, consistent with broader trends in the educational assessment industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 89.4%; rating input score 89; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 80% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $636.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.2M · 47 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $109M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 51 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 12 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.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.