Higher Education Technology Managers Alliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
863923205
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lake Forest, CA, USA
Phone
8302220101
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$718,927
Expenses
$639,115
Assets
$6,919,119
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Atkins Fleming (Treasurer): $6,000 total reported compensation
  • BC Hatchett (Emeritus BOD): $6,000 total reported compensation
  • Erin Maher-Moran (Chairperson): $4,500 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 Higher Education Technology Managers Alliance (HETMA) is a 501(c)3 advocacy organization focused on growing the influence and elevating the community, educating our members, amplifying our collective voice and impacting the broader AV industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

HETMA exists to advocate for the higher education technology manager within the global audiovisual and information technology markets. Methods to carryout our mission are as follows: InfoComm and ISE Booths; InforComm Higher Ed Summit; roadshows/regional groups; Virtual conferences; Lunch and Learn programs; Credientialed Professional program; Approved program; and scolarships.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 10
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.4%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.1%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 10.83; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.5% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -164.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.4% of revenue deployed · 70.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $449K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $6K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.