Polymer Processing Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 222458275
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Newark, NJ, USA
- Phone
- 9735965896
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,511,505
- Expenses
- $3,664,887
- Assets
- $5,026,568
- Liabilities
- $298,792
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Dr Ming Wan Young (PRESIDENT)
- Dr Kun H Hyun (President Emeritus)
Highest reported compensation
- Dr Ming Wan Young (PRESIDENT): $314,845 total reported compensation
- Kasia Strycharz (Secretary): $95,780 total reported compensation
- DR COSTAS G GOGOS (Board Chairman): $41,150 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Polymer processing institute ("ppi") is a private, non-for-profit New Jersey corporation, established in 1982. Ppi was established for the purpose of advancing the general knowledge of the public in the art, science and technology of polymer processing through scientific research and education performed in the us and abroad. Significant revenues are received from subcontracts with the New Jersey institute of technology ("njit") which contracts with the federal government on research projects in the field of polymers and from research fees from public and private companies.
What it reported doing in 2024
Research and development-providing research, education and publications to the polymer field for medical devices and pharmaceutical applications, packaging, recycling, paints and coatings, etc. Labs and equipment are available for students doing research.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 68
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94.4%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -4.4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94.4% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $101K reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 48/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.