Nanog Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272534183
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ann Arbor, MI, USA
Phone
8669021336
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,072,544
Expenses
$3,425,606
Assets
$3,597,867
Liabilities
$1,058,265

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • GREGORY NEWMAN (SR. DEV. SPE): $169,947 total reported compensation
  • VALERIE WITTKOP (PROGRAM DIRE): $148,831 total reported compensation
  • DARRIEUX WILLIAMS-HARVEY (MEETING + EV): $146,193 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nanog is committed to the ongoing advancement of an open, secure, and robust internet, by providing a platform that inspires, educates, and empowers our community to work together in building the internet of tomorrow.

What it reported doing in 2024

Nanog held 3 major conferences: nanog90 in charlotte with total attendees of 742. This was 629 in person and 113 virtual. Nanog91 in Kansas city with 735 attendees consisting of 673 in person and 62 virtual. Nanog92 in toronto, canada with 870 attendees consisting of 808 in person and 62 virtual. These conferences are networking conferences that provide opportunities for community members to further enhance networking discussions and proves for a rich set of presentations exploring current and relevant topics. Hackathons are also a part of these meetings which are a one day event bringing people together in a room to develop new ideas and hacks related to internet networking. 116,001 in donated services were used for these conferences.

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 100% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.4%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 79
  • 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: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.05; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.4% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $170K · 11 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.