Transcom Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
223606706
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Jersey City, NJ, USA
Phone
2019634033
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,714,383
Expenses
$15,414,404
Assets
$20,491,632
Liabilities
$11,132,369

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

22 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVE LEVINE (Executive Dir.): $228,406 total reported compensation
  • MARY BURATI (HR/ADMN SUPERVISOR): $187,492 total reported compensation
  • CHETAN KHARCHE (CTO): $185,430 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Transcom is a coalition of transportation and public safety agencies. It improves regional mobility and safety of the traveling public supporting its member agencies through interagency communication of real-time traffic data, planned and unplanned events and the enhanced utilization of agency existing traffic and transportation management systems. Transcom is a forum for coordinating the innovative and collaborative implementation of future systems.

What it reported doing in 2025

Base operations consist of transcom's day-to-day coordination activities (as well as the central administartive and planning functions to support these activities) through its 24-hour operations information center to collect traffic and transit incident information and disseminate it to affected agencies throughout the region

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 91.1%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 7.8%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.5%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 91.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $14M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $228K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.7M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.