Junior Engineering Technical Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
386089644
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2010
Forms available
Form 990 2010
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7035485387
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Public, Societal Benefit

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$919,307
Expenses
$1,130,059
Assets
$491,754
Liabilities
$107,351

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2010. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To increase student awareness of, aptitude for, and interest in engineering and technology-based professions.

What it reported doing in 2010

The National Engineering Design Challenge (NEDC) is an annual design competition in which students, in grades 9 - 12, put their creativity and problem-solving skills to use and create a workplace assistive technology device for a person with a disability. The objective of this program is to help high school student see how engineers make a difference in the world. The 2011 NEDC program provided approximately 1400 high school students a design-build, cross-curricular engineering program highlighting how engineers make a difference in the lives of people with disabilities. The participants are a diverse group with over one-half being young women. As college-bound students, the NEDC lets them combine their interest in engineering with work in the local community to discover their career potential. The top finalist school teams were brought to Washington, DC to present their device in front of a panel of judges for national level awards and prizes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.2%; rating input score 95; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Missing
    • 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: -22.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -7.4% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -39.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $995K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $106K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2009 to 2010
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.