National Elevator Industry Educational Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
236421955
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Attleboro Falls, MA, USA
Phone
(800) 228-8220
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,223,538
Expenses
$47,274,417
Assets
$181,428,025
Liabilities
$9,678,199

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID T MORGAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN J CAUGHEY (ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID T MORGAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $405,304 total reported compensation
  • JOHN J CAUGHEY (ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $339,083 total reported compensation
  • EDWARD L CHRISTENSEN JR (NATIONAL COORDINATOR): $301,476 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide education and training for the elevator industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education and training programs were provided to elevator constructor mechanics, assistant mechanics, helpers, and apprentices through employer contributions to a trust fund, aptitude test receipts, and reimbursements for educational materials. This is essentially the only program service of the organization and all of the revenues and expenses are considered to be for this purpose.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 92% 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.9%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.84; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 83.6% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $405K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.