Nanotechnology Enterprises Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264658496
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2011
Forms available
Form 990 2011
Location
Columbia, MO, USA
Phone
5737776798
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,948,788
Expenses
$1,926,563
Assets
$37,795
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2011. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Nanotechnology enterprises, inc. Operates to rapidly match the unique nanotechnology needs of the government with academia, small-to-large business and non-traditional contractors that have the knowledge and technical expertise to meet these demands and bring solutions to market quickly, thus saving the u.s. Government time, energy and resources.

What it reported doing in 2011

Program service: nanotechnology rpp w15qkn-11-9-0001-rpp1 (other transaction agreement, ota, with the u.s. Government) government pre-approved funding of nine projects for nanotechnology research and products.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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: 100
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.02; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.6%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.