SkillsUSA

Legal name: Skillsusa Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
520812433
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Leesburg, VA, US
Phone
703-737-0600
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Employment Procurement Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,739,937
Expenses
$25,212,273
Assets
$14,725,259
Liabilities
$1,300,003

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAUREEN THOLEN (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT & BUSINESS AND I)
  • SARAH HEATH (PRESIDENT)
  • LEIGH CREECH (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHELLE CHELLE TRAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • GAYLE SILVEY (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHELLE CHELLE TRAVIS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $268,973 total reported compensation
  • GAYLE SILVEY (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $149,108 total reported compensation
  • KIMBERLY GRAHAM (DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION): $131,205 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

SkillsUSA is the #1 workforce development organization for students. We empower students to become skilled professionals, career-ready leaders and responsible community members.

What it reported doing in 2024

Membership services provide training and leadership programs along with a linkage to nationwide business and industry partnerships to its members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 66% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 93.4%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.3%; rating input score 94; 24th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 5.7%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.1%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 93.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $23.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $269K · 27 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 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: 8 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.