New England Institute of Technology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
050312747
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
East Greenwich, RI, USA
Phone
401-739-5000
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Higher Education Institutions

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$107,197,170
Expenses
$87,142,545
Assets
$460,934,552
Liabilities
$93,871,598

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD I GOUSE (PRESIDENT & TRUSTEE)
  • KENNETH F JALBERT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CATHERINE KENNEDY (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • STEVEN KITCHIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALAN I RESNICK (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AMY GRZYBOWSKI (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD I GOUSE (PRESIDENT & TRUSTEE): $1,265,000 total reported compensation
  • CHERYL C CONNORS (SENIOR V.P. & TREASURER): $686,483 total reported compensation
  • SCOTT FREUND (EXEC. VICE PRES.): $538,310 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

With an emphasis on hands-on education, professional skill building from day one, instruction by industry leaders, small class sizes, extensive student support, and accelerated learning options, New England Tech remains committed to what we’ve always fostered most: student success. At New England Tech, we have always been driven by our mission to provide specialized undergraduate and graduate degree programs that emphasize personal and professional growth. Our model of hands-learning, taught by industry professionals, with extensive student support and flexibility, gives you the opportunity to explore your passion and turn it into your dream career. New England Tech’s innovative learning approaches help each student realize her or his potential, and develop a breadth of skills that include critical thinking, collaboration, problem solving, and adaptability. Our mission and model...

What it reported doing in 2024

General and technical education services

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 83% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration and the available information about grant readiness federal audit leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 29th 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: 18.7%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.29; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $87.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.3M · 25 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $179K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 15 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.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.