Maine Technology Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010529871
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Portland, ME, USA
Phone
2075824790
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Charter Schools

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,490,647
Expenses
$29,947,461
Assets
$22,477,274
Liabilities
$18,862,171

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Brian Whitney (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Brian Whitney (President): $196,196 total reported compensation
  • Gregory N Lee (Director of Finance & Administration): $140,989 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Institute, through a public and private partnership, shall encourage, promote, stimulate and support research and development activity leading to the commercialization of new products and services in Maine's technology-intensive industrial sectors to enhance the competitive position of those sectors and increase the likelihood that one or more of the sectors will support clusters of industrial activity and to create new jobs for Maine people. The Institute is one element of Maine's economic development strategy and will contribute to the long-term development of a statewide research, development and product deployment infrastructure.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Maine Technology Institute (MTI) invests in promising technologies by funding research and development projects in the state's seven technology sectors. MTI's competitive awards bring new products, services and processes to the market, generating high-quality jobs across Maine. Businesses, non-profit organizations, academic institutions and entrepreneurs are eligible for funding under MTI's program, which is outlined below: Initial contact is made when those interested complete an online intake form. Meetings are established with entities proposing projects. Using an assessment tool, the potential applicant and the Institute review eight different areas including: Team Ability, Innovation and Value Proposition, Customer and Market, Business/Organization Model, and Scope of Work/Budget. At this point the process may continue with the Institute or may be referred to a business partner. If the determination is to apply for support, the appropriate level of funding request will be determined, and the application will be submitted. The funding level will also determine the level of due diligence needed with the application. Funding levels may also help to determine the nature of the award. The Institute awards grants, loans and equity investments. Successful applicants who receive funds are also required to submit reporting on their projects for five years post award.Four funding levels are used in the application process, as follows: Range One Awards less than $25,000Range Two Awards between $25,000 and $100,000Range Three Awards between $100,000 and $250,000Range Four Awards over $250,000

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 78% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 33rd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.84; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.7%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $196K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $109K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 195 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 188 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.