Society for Underwater Technology Co Rodolfo Sancio

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202037714
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Houston, TX, USA
Phone
8328780116
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$69,957
Expenses
$117,054
Assets
$51,226
Liabilities
$1,261

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

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tricia Hill (Past President)
  • Andy Hill (President)

People named in this filing

  • Tricia Hill (Past President)
  • Andy Hill (President)
  • Rodolfo Sancio (Treasurer)

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

Sut is a learned society for individuals and organizations having a common interest in underwater technology, ocean science and offshore engineering.

What it reported doing in 2024

Subsea awareness courses are held peridiocally to provide an introduction course oftraining in underwater technology. These five day courses are dsigned for engineerswho are new to the offshore ndustry. Several five-day courses were held. Sut alsoparticipated in the offshore technology conference and the deep offshore technologycoference. Additional short courses were held on selected topics.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 74% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 24
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.6%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 19%; rating input score 19
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -67.3%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -27.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.6% of revenue deployed · 19% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 22 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.