Los Alamos Institutes
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 208369162
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Los Alamos, NM, USA
- Phone
- 5056620001
- Rating
- 45
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,504
- Expenses
- $14,461
- Assets
- $25,539
- Liabilities
- $14,401
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
People named in this filing
- CAROL CLARK (CHAIR)
- CRAIG WEHNER (VICE CHAIR)
- BILL WADT (IMMEDIATE PAST CHAIR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To lessen the burdens of government by providing for economic development through the development of technologies which will provide employment opportunities for the unemployed and the under-employed; to support the economic development mission of the lacdc and to engage in education and research projects consistent with the purposes of the lacdc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -7.1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.77; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -22.7% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.