The National Graduate School of Quality Management Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043250289
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
West Falmouth, MA, USA
Phone
5084571313
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Graduate, Professional Schools (Separate Entities)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,519
Expenses
$140,109
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DR ROBERT ANTONUCCI (CHAIRMAN): $22,915 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide a comprehensive advanced education to individuals seeking a bechelor's degree, master's degree and doctorate in quality systems management and homeland security.

What it reported doing in 2020

The following is the school's former program service accomplishment as the school did not provide any program services during the current fiscal year as it was in the process of liquidating (see schedule o for further) - to provide working adults with higher-level knowledge and understanding of the concepts, principles and tools of quality-based systems management for performance excellence. To graduate individuals with behavioral, analytical, customer service, and leadership skills to achieve tangible and measurable results for organizational performance excellence. To raise the overall understanding of quality-based systems management in the public and private sectors nationwide. To develop proponents and educators of quality systems management able to further understanding and application of the concepts, principles and tools.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 3
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 64.2%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5,462.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -31.1% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -22% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -30.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 64.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $90K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $23K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.