National Institute for Metalworking Skills Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521933455
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fairfax, VA, USA
Phone
7033524971
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Vocational Counseling

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,719,581
Expenses
$1,998,664
Assets
$1,275,055
Liabilities
$548,108

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MONTEZ KING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY)

Highest reported compensation

  • MONTEZ KING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY): $232,484 total reported compensation
  • ALEXANDER STARNER (SENIOR TECHNICAL ADVISOR): $141,372 total reported compensation
  • SARAH MERCADO (DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC INITIATIVES): $121,480 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Development and promulgation of precision manufacturing skill standards, certifies individual skills against standards, accredits programs that meet quality requirements.

What it reported doing in 2024

Standards and product development: nims has developed a smart standards methodology to properly train employees in a world where technology emerges, and changes faster than an average individual can master in their career span. Its customizable format is aligned with manufacturers and based on specific job roles within an occupation that are easily stackable into a masterful career. Smart standards enable communities to define their specific job roles from a collection of industry-recognized job duties.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 87% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • 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: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 63rd 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.43; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 91.4% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $232K · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.