Illinois Institute of Technology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362170136
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3125673332
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
University or Technological Institute

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$448,541,928
Expenses
$458,259,919
Assets
$833,343,232
Liabilities
$400,037,523

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

Leadership & pay

97 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Raj Echambadi (President)
  • Jess Goode (Vice President, Extn'l Affairs)
  • Sean Campbell (Vice President of Advancement)
  • Michael Gosz (Vice President for Data Analytics/Former Officer)

Highest reported compensation

  • Raj Echambadi (President): $865,337 total reported compensation
  • Kenneth Christensen (Provost, SVP Academic Affairs): $543,082 total reported compensation
  • Lance Fortnow (Professor and Dean COS): $478,636 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 provide distinctive and relevant education in an environment of scientific, technological, and professional knowledge creation and innovation. Illinois Tech’s mission statement captures explicitly the character of the education paradigm that Illinois Tech’s academic units are contributing in both education and research. The key word is ** _relevant_** : embracing the faculty’s commitment to providing an education that focuses on preparing our students for fulfilled lives after graduation and for careers that contribute to solving important problems facing humanity.

What it reported doing in 2024

INSTRUCTION SUPPORT:- Illinois Institute of Technology's (IIT) seven colleges allow students to discover new frontiers in engineering, science, architecture, business, design, human sciences, applied technology, and law. The school's nationally ranked undergraduate and graduate programs offer exceptional preparation for professions that require technological sophistication, an innovative mindset, and an entrepreneurial spirit. The University's emphasis on collaboration and interdisciplinary study and research will prepare students to work across traditional boundaries and to experience a professional future where success knows no limits. (SEE SCHEDULE O)

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 76% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, and 39% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 98
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.9%; rating input score 97; 52nd 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: -2.2%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.82; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 87.8% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 63 of 65 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $391.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $865K · 97 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $17.3M reported
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 14 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 30 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.