Industrial Technology Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
382388532
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Plymouth, MI, USA
Phone
7344514211
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,431,374
Expenses
$12,780,031
Assets
$11,390,540
Liabilities
$3,063,555

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • INGRID TIGHE (PRESIDENT, MMTC)
  • JAMES GORMAN (VICE PRESIDENT, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT)
  • TINA HURITE (VICE PRESIDENT, OPERATIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • INGRID TIGHE (PRESIDENT, MMTC): $290,358 total reported compensation
  • CHUCK RAYMOND WERNER (MANAGER OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE): $235,371 total reported compensation
  • TINA HURITE (VICE PRESIDENT, OPERATIONS): $218,818 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 enhance the global competitiveness of Michigan's small to medium-sized manufacturers.

What it reported doing in 2024

Industrial technology institute (iti) doing business as Michigan manufacturing technology center (mmtc), has secured grant funding from the u.s. Department of commerce agency national institute of standards and technology (nist) under the program manufacturing extension partnership (mep). The focus of the grant is primarily to provide courses and consulting to small and medium size manufacturers within the entire state of Michigan. The courses are updated annually to address the manufacturing industry's development. The courses consist of industry quality standards, techniques to attain efficiency, program management, leadership training and strategic consulting. Clients completing post-project surveys in 2024 credited their mmtc projects with created sales of $158.5 million, retained sales of $449.2 million, jobs created and retained 4,949, new investments of $104.6 million, and cost savings of $29.1 million.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 78% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 82.1%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.27; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.9%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.2% of revenue deployed · 82.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $290K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 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.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.