Institute of Nuclear Materials Management

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310740753
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3179070090
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,064,070
Expenses
$1,716,215
Assets
$991,605
Liabilities
$78,725

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TINA HERNANDEZ (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JAMES ANDRE (TREASURER)
  • YANA FELDMAN (MEMBER AT LA)
  • MAREK FLASKA (MEMBER AT LA)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Inmm is dedicated to the safe, secure, and effective management and stewardship of nuclear and other radioactive materials. We promote the advancement of scientific knowledge and technologies, professional development, best practices, and policy dialogue.

What it reported doing in 2024

The annual and additional meetings provide attendees with a professional forum for the exchange of the latest technical information in nuclear materials management. The meetings address all aspects of nuclear material management with papers and posters organized by the inmm technical program committee. All attendees mostly members, compromised by the academics, consultants, government contractors/employees. Licensees, news media, non- governmental organizations, nuclear laboratories, private industry professionals, public officials, publics utilities and graduate students attend the multi-day inmm annual meeting. There are typically 60 concurrent educational sessions. Papers presented at the annual meeting are published online for members and meeting attendees and will be available for subscription to nonmembers in the future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 78.6%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.9%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 46.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65% of revenue deployed · 78.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.