Marine Technology Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520805471
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2028277171
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Marine Science and Oceanography

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,126,460
Expenses
$5,152,646
Assets
$10,370,544
Liabilities
$1,189,296

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susan Hunt (President)
  • Gerhard Kuska began 112025 (President Elect)
  • Justin Manley (Past President)
  • Zdenka Willis ended 123124 (Past President)
  • Chris Ostrander (Chief Executive Officer)
  • Jill Zande (MATE Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Chris Ostrander (Chief Executive Officer): $338,015 total reported compensation
  • Jill Zande (MATE Executive Director): $169,200 total reported compensation
  • Claire Idell (Sr. Dir, Engagement/Member Relations): $148,056 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Facilitate a broader understanding of the relevance of marine technology to wider global issues by enhancing the dissemination of marine technology information. Promote and improve marine technology and related educational programs. Advance the development of the tools and procedures required to explore, study and further the responsible and sustainable use of the oceans.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conferences and Workshops: Annual regional, local, and international conferences on matters relating to the ocean and marine technology. Additionally, MTS offered several free-of-charge webinars during the fiscal year.MTS supports local Sections, which focus on events and programs unique to their specific geographic area in the United States and internationally.In addition, MTS operates Professional Committees ("Committees") representing technical interest groups that facilitate the exchange and transfer of technical information among professionals from academia, government, and industry. Continued in Schedule O

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.4%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 15.9%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.01; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.4%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.4% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $4.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $338K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.