Text Encoding Initiative
Legal name: Text Encoding Initiative Consortium
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 542047783
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Wakefield, MA, USA
- Phone
- 7812460500
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Computer Science
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $40,014
- Expenses
- $60,912
- Assets
- $122,108
- Liabilities
- $568
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
People named in this filing
- GIMENA DEL RIO RIANDE (DIRECTOR)
- HUGH CAYLESS (TREASURER)
- JAMES CUMMINGS (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To develop, maintain, and promulgate hardware- and software-independent methods for encoding humanities data in electronic form.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization maintains a text encoding standard available free of charge to the general public. In addition, memberships are offered and the members and subscribers are invited to an annual membership meeting.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 97
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 90.7%; rating input score 91
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -52.2%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.5% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -4.9% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $55K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.