Operational Technology Cybersecurity Coalition Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 884189934
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, USA
- Phone
- 2027199999
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $317,500
- Expenses
- $308,521
- Assets
- $8,979
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TATYANA BOLTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- CHET NAMBOODRI (CHAIR)
- ALISON KING (VICE CHAIR OF MARKETING)
- DIMPLE SHAH (VICE CHAIR OF OPERATIONS)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote and represent the common business interest of and direct its activities towards the improvement of business conditions for the industrial control system and operational technology cybersecurity industry.
What it reported doing in 2024
Ensuring that government promotes effective operational technology cybersecurity providing information to legislators and agencies as well as engaging in meaningful discussion with stakeholders at a variety of national meetings as well as personal meetings with various stakeholders.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.8%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $271K reported
- Consistency: 33 of 39 current checks pass · 6 findings to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLobbying column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesOther column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.