Institute of Transportation Engineers Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 530232732
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2027850060
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Engineering and Technology
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,189,181
- Expenses
- $8,105,946
- Assets
- $19,202,920
- Liabilities
- $12,197,959
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KAREN ASPELIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
- ROSANA CORREA JACOBS (PAST PRESIDENT)
- JOHN DAVIS (PRESIDENT)
- STEVE KUCIEMBA (EXECUTIVE DIRECT AND CEO)
- COLLEEN A AGAN (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- KATHI P DRIGGS (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- STEVE KUCIEMBA (EXECUTIVE DIRECT AND CEO): $372,374 total reported compensation
- KATHI P DRIGGS (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $278,047 total reported compensation
- MATTHEW HARDY (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CHIEF TECHNICAL OFFI): $235,519 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 be the principal source of professional expertise, knowledge and ideas promoting transportation science, principals and advocacy internationally.
What it reported doing in 2024
Scholarships/fellowships/awards - all expenses incurred to provide scholarships and fellowships to students wishing to pursue course work in transportation engineering. All expenses incurred to select, distribute, and present awards for excellence in the field of transportation engineering and service to the organization.
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 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 most voting board members are independent. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 55
- Transparency & Controls: 93
- Accountability: 92
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 62.6%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 61.3%; rating input score 61
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.37; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 62.6% of revenue deployed · 61.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $372K · 23 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
- Consistency: 30 of 32 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.