National Society of Professional Engineers Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
526056276
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7036842800
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,979
Expenses
$49,320
Assets
$1,765,792
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MONIKA SCHULZ CAE (SECRETARY/NSPE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MAEGUERITE MCCLAM (PRESIDENT)
  • ADRIAN BROWN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MONIKA SCHULZ CAE (SECRETARY/NSPE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $327,961 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES HOLLIS JR (TRUSTEE): $187,465 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 expand the public awareness, understanding, and appreciation of the role and value of engineers in improving the quality of life; to enhance the image of and respect for engineers; to demonstrate the diverse face of engineering; to promote engineering as a viable and rewarding career; to increase the number of students who pursue a career in engineering; and to advance the quality of engineering professionals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarship program - to develop the capabilities of individuals through education as engineers for eventual service as engineers to the united states and industry by providing scholarships at the undergraduate level for outstanding undergraduate engineering students who are enrolled in and pursuing the study of engineering at an accredited college or university.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 30%; rating input score 30
  • Program expense ratio: 31.5%; rating input score 32
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 35.8; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 136.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 30% of revenue deployed · 31.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $16K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $328K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.