National Council for Geographic Education

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
046050994
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Phone
8334656243
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$316,163
Expenses
$316,828
Assets
$492,421
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas Herman (Executive Director (beginning March 2025))
  • Charlie D Regan (Executive Director (until March 2025))
  • Phillip Hare (Past President)
  • Celeste Reynolds (President)
  • John Scott Greene (President-Elect)

Highest reported compensation

  • Thomas Herman (Executive Director (beginning March 2025)): $33,333 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Organization works to enhance the status and quality of geography teaching and learning. The Organization serves this mission in order to promote and support geography education and educators.

What it reported doing in 2025

The National Council for Geographic Education (NCGE) is a non-profit organization, chartered in 1915 to enhance the status and quality of geography teaching and learning. NCGE supports geography teaching at all levels - from Kindergarten through University. NCGE's mission is to both promote and celebrate geographic teaching and learning. Our activities include: conducting and gathering research; producing journals and other geography publications; developing curricular resources; providing professional development opportunities; honoring teachers, mentors and researchers; advocating for geography in schools; and organizing an annual conference.

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 98% 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

STRONG - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $40.71 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $270K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $33K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.