National Coordinating Committee for Multiemployer Plans

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521041104
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027375315
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,292,050
Expenses
$2,891,424
Assets
$3,985,421
Liabilities
$1,429,772

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL SCOTT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SEAN MCGARVEY (CHAIRMAN): $671,305 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL SCOTT (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $561,550 total reported compensation
  • MARIAH BECKER (DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH AND E): $362,305 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 nccmp is the only national organization devoted exclusively to protecting the interests of the unions and the job-creating employers of america that jointly sponsor multiemployer retirement and welfare plans and the more than 20 million active and retired american workers and their families who rely on multiemployer retirement and welfare plans. The nccmp's purpose is to assure an environment in which multiemployer plans can continue their vital role in providing retirement, health, training, and other benefits to america's working women and men.

What it reported doing in 2024

Monitor the developments in the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government that impact multiemployer employee benefit plans.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 87
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.6%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • 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: 12.2%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.6% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $671K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $239K reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 30/100.