NCCCO Foundation Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 831349117
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018
- Location
- Murray, UT, USA
- Phone
- 7035602391
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $748,202
- Expenses
- $653,253
- Assets
- $798,558
- Liabilities
- $38,563
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ingo Schiller (Director & President)
- Garry Higdem (Director & Vice President)
- Thomas Cantwell (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Thomas Sicklesteel (Ex Officio Member): $466,958 total reported compensation
- Thomas Cantwell (Executive Director): $188,676 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
NCCCO Foundation, Inc. (the "Charity") is an educational, scientific, and charitable organization. See Sch O for detailed mission statement.
What it reported doing in 2025
Research - The Charity sponsors original research into safety and workforce matters affecting the crane and related industries. Examples of research studies conducted include: identification of common safety hazards in the crane industry, exploratory workforce research to understand several topics of interest, including the demographic makeup of load-handling employees, the state of the current recruitment pipeline, and how load-handling employees view their jobs and certification, the potential for virtual reality in certification testing; and the impact of OSHA's evaluation requirement on employers' efforts to qualify their crane operators.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Affiliate-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.3%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.7%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 33.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 80.3% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $595K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $467K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $117K reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: 2 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.
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: 4 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.