National Strategic Research Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455426026
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lincoln, NE, USA
Phone
4024723767
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,208,530
Expenses
$24,082,132
Assets
$17,999,608
Liabilities
$10,702,524

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Richard Evans III (Executive Director)
  • John Tencer (Associate Executive Director)
  • Christopher Yeaw (Associate Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Christopher Kabourek (Treasurer (THRU 09/2024)): $958,273 total reported compensation
  • Christopher Kratochvil MD (Strategic Advisor - Global Health Security): $569,175 total reported compensation
  • Dr Kenneth Bayles (Director): $500,201 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

National Strategic Research Institute (NSRI)'s mission is to enable deterrence of, preparedness for, and response to strategic national security threats across multiple domains through research and support.

What it reported doing in 2024

National Strategic Research Institute (NSRI) was organized to operate as a University Affiliated Research Center (UARC) in responding to the research and development needs of the Department of Defense (DOD) U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM). NSRI's purpose in establishing and operating the UARC is to provide a partnership between DOD and the University of Nebraska to meet the engineering, research, and technology needs of the DOD/USSTRATCOM in support of the U.S. Government's responsibility to undertake research related to advancing the science of countering threats to U.S. National Security in the areas of (1) Nuclear detection and forensics, (2) Detection of chemical and biological weapons, (3) Passive defense against weapons of mass destruction, (4) consequence management, and (5) mission-related research.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.5%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 0.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.75; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.5% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $958K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $769K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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.
  • 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.