TRC
Legal name: Transportation Research Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 311228202
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- East Liberty, OH, USA
- Phone
- +1-937-666-2011
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $106,625,005
- Expenses
- $79,462,337
- Assets
- $160,700,604
- Liabilities
- $97,868,576
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MR BRETT ROUBINEK (PRESIDENT/CEO)
- MS TAYLOR WEIDELING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SERVICES)
Highest reported compensation
- DR PETER MOHLER (EX-OFFICIO): $1,202,312 total reported compensation
- MR MICHAEL PAPADAKIS (EX-OFFICIO): $1,126,655 total reported compensation
- MR BRETT ROUBINEK (PRESIDENT/CEO): $567,600 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To improve the safety of people throughout the world by applying the most advanced, leading-edge expertise, by a team of passionate and dedicated professionals not found anywhere else.
What it reported doing in 2024
Transportation research center inc. Managed the operations of the transportation research center facility and conducts research services regarding the design of automotive vehicle testing procedures and equipment for both government safety testing agencies and private sponsors.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 66
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.9%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 13th 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: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 25.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.02; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.61; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.9%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 66.9% of revenue deployed · 91.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $72.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $14.7M reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 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
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.