Techserve Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521572753
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7038382050
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,806,931
Expenses
$3,078,766
Assets
$4,820,805
Liabilities
$1,872,066

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOEL LEEGE (PRESIDENT)
  • KIP WRIGHT (VP/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MARK ROBERTS ESQ (CHIEF EXEC.): $1,008,971 total reported compensation
  • SONA SHARMA (CHIEF MARKET): $205,470 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN DONOHOE (CHIEF PROGRA): $192,097 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Part iii, line 1: to fully support legislative, regulatory and judicial efforts which protect the freedom of choice of firms to provide services to their clients using independent contractors or employees, or a combination thereof. To ensure industry firms can operate without ill advised governmental restrictions and burdens.

What it reported doing in 2024

Programs & services - techserve alliance provides a variety of services to members in advancement of the industry: studies, white papers, online communities, web directory, model agreements reflecting "best practices", legal information, publication (industry update), operating practices report, and web presence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 86% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

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: 83
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.57; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -0.8% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $675K reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.