The Concord Consortium Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043254131
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Concord, MA, USA
Phone
9784053200
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,349,695
Expenses
$7,891,357
Assets
$3,331,826
Liabilities
$1,201,553

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHAD DORSEY (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHAD DORSEY (PRESIDENT/CEO): $316,149 total reported compensation
  • LAWRENCE BEHAN (CFO (UNTIL 12/2024)): $244,268 total reported compensation
  • LESLIE BONDARYK (CTO): $222,292 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The concord consortium innovates and inspires equitable, large-scale improvements in stem teaching and learning through technology...(continued on schedule o)

What it reported doing in 2024

Data science education - the concord consortium advances data literacy by developing open-source software and curricula that help students explore real-world data and leading national data science education coalitions. In fy25, we expanded the common online data analysis platform (codap at codap.concord.org), contributed to the k-12 data literacy and data science learning progressions; and partnered with universities and nonprofits to prepare teachers for data-rich instruction. Projects included co-designing a new master's plus program in data science education, developing novel interfaces for analyzing data, and broadening an open-source ecosystem for data science education. In fy25, codap had 1.3 million new users.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 68% 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

SUPPORTED - 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: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.42; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.5%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $316K · 23 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $161K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors 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
  • 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 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.