Henry C Lee Institute of Forensic Science Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
061629144
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
West Haven, CT, USA
Phone
2039327000
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Higher Education Institutions

Reported finances

Revenue
$509,796
Expenses
$274,909
Assets
$7,734,252
Liabilities
$5,283

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BROOKE KAMMRATH (SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • CLAIRE GLYNN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • GEORGE SYNODI (VP FOR FINANCE AND ADMINISTATION): $479,310 total reported compensation
  • BROOKE KAMMRATH (SECRETARY AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $209,022 total reported compensation
  • CLAIRE GLYNN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $208,286 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science advances education, research, and professional training in forensic science and criminal justice. The Institute serves students, scholars, law enforcement professionals, legal practitioners, and the broader community by providing applied learning opportunities, specialized training programs, and research initiatives that address scientific and societal challenges in forensic science and the administration of justice.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Institute conducts a comprehensive program of education, professional training, and research in forensic science and criminal justice. Activities include the development and delivery of advanced training programs, workshops, and symposia for law enforcement personnel, forensic scientists, attorneys, judges, educators, and other professionals. These programs emphasize the practical application of forensic methodologies, emerging technologies, and interdisciplinary collaboration. The Institute also supports research and applied laboratory activities in areas such as crime scene investigation, evidence analysis, and related scientific disciplines. In addition, the Institute supports academic programming and student engagement through educational initiatives, guest lectures, and collaborative projects that enhance learning and promote career development in forensic science and criminal justice.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 61% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.1%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 28.13; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 51.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $479K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.