Paper Technology Foundationinc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
381691181
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kalamazoo, MI, USA
Phone
2693872365
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Services, Organizations of Students

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,663,326
Expenses
$1,329,778
Assets
$6,977,366
Liabilities
$215

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

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS DAVID (PRESIDENT)
  • MARK ZEMPEL (PRESIDENT -)

Highest reported compensation

  • EDWARD B MONTGOMERY (TRUSTEE): $661,703 total reported compensation
  • JANICE J VAN DER KLEY (TREASURER): $370,154 total reported compensation
  • STEVE BUTT (TRUSTEE): $361,648 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 provide leadership and support to western Michigan university and the department of chemical and paper engineering to develop motivated graduates in order to advance the global pulp and paper industry.

What it reported doing in 2024

To support paper engineering at western Michigan university. The paper technology foundation, inc. Supports undergraduate student development by providing scholarships and by funding professional industry conference attendance, professional and personal development training sessions, networking and mentoring events with industry leaders, career development, and industry field trips and mill tours.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 78.9%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.19 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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.2%; rating input score 90; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.1%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.25; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.5% of revenue deployed · 78.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 37 of 41 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $662K · 41 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.