Technology and Data Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
861903499
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022, Form 990-EZ 2021
Location
Greensboro, NC, USA
Phone
3366690910
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,500,000
Expenses
$65,442
Assets
$1,571,298
Liabilities
$126,750

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIAN NORRIS (VICE PRESIDENT, SIBHP)
  • WALKER SANDERS (PRESIDENT, CFGG)

People named in this filing

  • STEVE LINGERFELT (IT DIRECTOR, CITY OF HIGH POINT)
  • RODNEY ROBERTS (CIO, CITY OF GREENSBORO)
  • DONNA HEATH (VICE CHANCELLOR & CIO, UNCG)

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 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Providing technology and data readiness and capacity to the 12 county piedmont region of nc.

What it reported doing in 2022

This grant aims to address digital inequity within the guilford county community by piloting a model for delivering no-cost education network access to pre-k through 5th grade students, where poor or no internet access exists.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

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: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 90
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0.1%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 1.3%; rating input score 1
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 95.6%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.01; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 197.6% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 168% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0.1% of revenue deployed · 1.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $819 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.